Skip to main content

Full text of "The history of the popes, from the close of the middle ages : drawn from the secret Archives of the Vatican and other original sources; from the German"

See other formats




_ . . '~i:^\.iot-i 

in A H u ^ 

.?35 1891 V. 




, Ludwig, 1854-1928 

The history of the 

popes , 


the close of 





■• - •■/■.••■; .- 

•■';•> :■•'*■■ .'-■ ■•■- 


■s. ^^< 


VOL. Xll. 


THE HISTORY OF THE POPES. Translated from 
the German of Dr. Ludwig Pastor. Edited, as to Vols. I. -VI., 
by the late Frederick Ignatius Antropus, and, as to Vols. 
VII. -XIV,, by Francis Ralph Kekr of the London Oratory. 
In 14 Volumes. 

Vols. I. and II, a.d, 1305-1458, 

Vols. III. and IV. a.d. 1458-1483. 

Vols. V. and VI. a.d. 1484-15 13. 

Vols. VII. and VIII. a.d. 1513-1521. 

Vols. IX. and X. A.D. 1522-1534. 

Vols. XI. and XII. A.D. 1534-1549. 

Vols. XIII. and XIV. in preparalion. 

OCT 271024 





De. ludwig ^PASTOE, 








Printed in Great Britain lu Butler & Tancei. Frame and London 


Table of Contents ..... 
List of Unpublished Documents in Appendix 



Its work in 

Paul III., 1534-1549 
Ignatius of Loyola and the Society of Jesus 
Constitutions of the Society of Jesus 

Europe and the Indies 

The Turkish war. The meeting between Paul III. and 

Charles V. at Lucca, The conciliar question, 


The meeting between Paul III. and Charles V. at 
Busseto. Suspensionof the Council. The Pope's 
neutrality and exertions for peace. Misunder- 
standings with the Emperor .... 

Spread of the German schism. Cardinal Farnese's 
mission to Worms. Negotiations for an alliance 
between Paul III. and Charles V. against the 
Protestants. Investiture of Pier Luigi Famese 
with Parma and Piacenza. The convening of the 
Council of Trent 

Transactions and decrees of the five first sessions of 
the Council of Trent (December 1545 to June 


The Papal-Imperial league of June 1546. The 

Schmalkaldic war 

^ For Bibliography see Volume XI. 









Dissensions between Paul III. and Charles V. . , 300-336 

Progress of the Council of Trent. Its removal to 
Bologna. The Schmalkaldic war ends in victory 
for the Emperor. Assassination of Pier Luigi 

Farnese 337-374 

The Emperor in opposition to the Pope and the 

authority of the Council ..... 375-408 

The Interim. Last days of Paul III. His death . 409-455 
The completion of the ecclesiastical revolution in 
England and Scandinavia. The Protestant pro- 
paganda in France ...... 456-487 

The Protestant propaganda in Poland and Italy. 
Foundation of the Roman Inquisition. The Pope's 
support of Christian missions outside Europe, and 
his activity in other spheres of work . . . 488-522 
Paul III. as the patron of learning and art . . . 523-648 
Appendix of Unpublished Documents . . . 649-683 
Index of Names 684-707 




Birth of Ignatius of Loyola (1491 or 1495) during the 

pontificate of Alexander VI. 
The chief sources for his life and works 
His family and birthplace ..... 
1521 Early life and subsequent conversion 

He makes a pilgrimage to Montserrat and goes to live 

at Manresa. His manner of life 
Manresa may be called the birthplace of the Society 

of Jesus ....... 

Ignatius begins to give "spiritual exercises" 
Examination and description of the " Book of 

the Exercises " . . 
Its object and effect ..... 

Literary sources of the "Spiritual Exercises" 
Little borrowed from other writers — taken as a whole 

it is a new and original work 
Paul III. declares the book to be "full of piety and 

holiness" ....... 

Ignatius says of it, " This is our armoury " 
Influence of the " Exercises " on the great spiritual 

teachers of the age ..... 
1523 Ignatius arrives in Rome (March 29th) for the first 

time and proceeds to the Holy Land . 
His return to Barcelona, and life there 
Incurs the suspicion of the authorities and is im 


^ Unpublished documents are marked by an asterisk (*) ; documents to be 
published in "Acta Pontificum Romanorum" are designated by two 
asterisks (**). 



1528 He goes to Paris (February 2nd), and followers gather 

round him . , . . . . .21 

1534 The vows taken by Ignatius and his six companions 

at Montmartre (August 15th) .... 22 

1536 They leave Paris and go to Venice .... 23 

To await a vessel to take them to Palestine . . 24 
This being impossible, they resolve to visit the Italian 

Universities . . . = . . '25 
Ignatius and the first Jesuits in Rome ... 26 
1538 Ten members of the Society now in the city — their work 27 
Attacks on the Society — Ignatius' interview with 
Paul III. at Frascati ..... 

The Jesuits completely acquitted — Ignatius says his 

first Mass on Christmas Day 
The Society placed " unreservedly at the disposal of 
the Pope" ...... 

Discussion on the vow of obedience . 

The "Constitutions" submitted for examination 

1540 They are confirmed by the Pope (September 27th) 

1 541 Ignatius chosen (April) General of the Society . 
Various privileges granted by the Pope 

1549 These are ratified by a Bull (October i8th) 
Beginnings of the house and church of the " Gesu 
Works undertaken by the Society in Rome 
The houses of S. Marta and S. Caterina . 
Work in the hospitals ..... 
Ignatius and the dispute between Paul III. and the 

King of Portugal ..... 
The work of instruction in Christian doctrine . 
1547 The Roman clergy enjoined to attend lectures by 

the Jesuits 51 

Ignatius declines the direction of convents of nuns 52 

Difficulties with Isabel Roser and her associates 52 

Refusal of Ignatius to amalgamate with other Ordcro 54 
And opposes the acceptance of dignities . . -55 

Method of Ignatius in training his companions . . 56 



Need of a Rule consolidated in writing ... 58 
I 547 Ignatius begins to commit his work to writing . . 58 

1550 The final "Formula of the Institute" confirmed by 

Julius III., July 2 ist -59 








A.IJ. Py^GE 

1552 The Constitutions promulgated throughout the Society. 

Method followed by St. Ignatius in writing the 

Constitutions ....... 60 

The scope, object, and description of the enactments 

of the Constitutions ...... 61 

The definition of " blind obedience" ... 67 

End for which the colleges are called into being . 69 

The fourth solemn vow ...... 70 

The educational rules of the Constitutions . .71 

The Society, despite its complexity, must maintain its 

characteristic of unity ..... 73 

Means of attaining this solidarity .... 74 

St. Ignatius rejects the old methods .... 76 
" To the greater glory of God " . . . . .77 

1545 The first Jesuits at the Council of Trent ... 78 
Instructions given to them by Ignatius ... 79 
Laynez and Salmeron at Trent ..... 80 

1546 Letter of Salmeron to Ignatius (July) ... 81 

1547 As a consequence of the work of the Jesuits at the 

Council, many bishops wish to have them in 

their dioceses ....... 82 

1545 Beginnings of the Society in Venice .... 83 

Whither Laynez is sent by the Pope .... 84 

Many Italian bishops obtain the services of the Jesuits 84 

Who go to Montepulciano, Verona, Minori, Faenza . 84 
Belluno and Modena; in the latter place Salmeron 

has difficulties with Cardinal Morone ... 85 
Le Jay sent to Modena to counteract the influence of 

the Duchess Renee . . . ... 86 

The Society in Florence and Parma .... 87 

In Casola, Correggio, and Castiglione, etc. . . 88 

1547 Beginnings of the Society in Sicily .... 89 

Canisius and ten others go to Messina ... 90 

1539 The first Jesuits to enter Spanish territory . . 91 

They are defended by Prince Philip . . . .92 

1544 In spite of opposition many colleges are founded . 92 
Salamanca is the centre of this opposition • . . 93 
The Dominican, Melchior Cano, and the Jesuits . 94 
Early life of Francis Borgia . . . . . 96 

T548 His profession in the Society (February ist) . . 97 
The King of Portugal asks for Jesuit missionaries for 

the East Indies 98 

1545 Rodriguez in Portugal — foundation of the College 

of Coimbra ....... 99 

1542 Salmeron and Broet visit Ireland, passing by way of 

Scotland . . ^ .... 100 

1 12 



1542 Beginnings of the Society in France ... 101 

Work of Peter Faber at Louvain .... 102 

1540 Commencement of his work in Germany . , . 103 

1542 Visits Spires, Mayence, and Cologne . . . . 104 
At the latter place founds the first Jesuit settlement 

in German territory ...... 

Work of Le Jay in Bavaria and other parts of Germany 

1543 Activity of his colleague, Bobadilla .... 
The first German Jesuit : Peter Canisius . 

1549 Jesuits sent to the University of Ingolstadt 

Canisius begins his lectures there (November 26th) . 
Missions of the Society to Abyssinia and the Congo . 

1540 St. Francis Xavier starts (March i6th) on his mission 

to the Indies . . . . . . .114 

His labours at Goa and in the neighbourhood . • i ' 5 
His manner of life and work — his successes . .116 

1549 Is named Provincial for India . . . . .118 

Starts from Malacca for Japan (June 24th) . .120 

Ignatius and Xavier what they were through the 

Papacy . . . . . . . .122 

" Manresa the grammar school, Rome the University " 122 



1 541 Ferdinand I. retreats from Ofen, which is captured by 

the Sultan (August 26th) 124 

Alarm aroused by this in Vienna and Rome . .125 
Charles V. determines to attack Algiers . . .125 
Paul III. arrives at Lucca on September the Sth and 

the Emperor on the 12th . . . . .126 

Conferences of the two heads of Christendom — subjects 

claiming their attention . . . . .127 
Milan, the religious affairs of Germany and the Catholic 

League . . . . . . . .128 

Charles V. sails from Spezia to attack Algiers 

(September 28th) 129 

Total failure of the campaign (October 24th) . . 130 
The Pope begins to make preparations for the Council 131 
Contarini and Aleander to make proposals regarding 

time and place . . . . . . • ijr 

Mantua proposed as the place of meeting . . .132 
Attitude of Francis I. — opinions as to the place vary 

widely, Trent strongly recommended . . . 133 




1542 Mission of Morone to Germany . . . . 134 

His unceasing activity . . . . . -135 
Announces the Pope's determination to summon the 

Council ........ 136 

His arrival at Spires (September Sth), and the opening 

of the Diet 137 

His interview with, and remarks to, King Ferdinand . 138 
Morone receives permission to lay his instructions 

before the Diet, and states that the Pope would 

be glad to summon the Council to Trent (March) 139 
And proposes August the 15th as date of opening . 140 
The Protestants at once raise a protest . . .140 
Cambrai is then proposed . ..... 141 

Attitude of Ferdinand towards the demands of the 

Protestant Estates ...... 

The Diet and the Turkish war — worthlessness of the 

troops raised . . . . . . .143 

Utter failure of the attack on Ofen . . . -144 
The Pope finally decides to summon the Council to 

Trent (April-May) 144 

The Bull to this effect (dated May 22nd) is promul- 
gated . _ 145 

Francis I. meets it with a flat refusal. . . .145 
The Protestants renew their protest and the Emperor 

also is unfavourable . . . . . .146 

Efforts of Paul IH. to promote peace between Charles 

and Francis ....... 147 

But war breaks out between the two monarchs (July) 148 
The Pope appoints Legates to the Emperor and the 

King of France . . . . . . .149 

The Papal neutrality unbearable to Charles V. . .150 
His embittered letter to the Pope (August 25th) in 

reply to the conciliar Bull . . . . .150 
But Paul HI. will not be moved to depart from his 

neutral attitude . . . . . • 152 

Preparations commenced at Trent for the Council . 153 
Three conciliar Legates nominated (October i6th) . 154 
Continued opposition of the Emperor and the King 

of France ........ 

The Pope decides (November loth) to address a brief 

to both monarchs ...... 156 

The Legates arrive at Trent, but very few prelates . 157 
Ferdinand expresses his delight at the beginning of the 

Council and the Emperor nominates orators . 158 
1543 Granvelle and his companions arrive at Trent (January 

7th) 159 



AD. PACfi 

1543 And appear before the Legates (January 9th) , . iCo 
Suspicious proceedings of Granvelle .... i6i 
The Italian bishops urged to a speedy attendance at 

the Council (January) ..... 162 
Truchsess sent to the Diet at Nuremberg; he com- 
plains of the neglect shown by the German 

bishops (February) 163 

And has interviews with King Ferdinand, Granvelle, 

and the Bishop of Augsburg . . . .164 

Who on the whole confine themselves to empty 

promises ........ 165 

At last a few more bishops arrive at Trent . .166 

Small attendance owing to the conduct of the Emperor 

and the French King , , . . 168 



1543 Paul III. leaves Rome (February 26th) and arrives at 

Bologna (March 17th) 160 

Discussion in consistory (May nth) on the postpone- 
ment of the Council . . . . . . 1 7c 

Granvelle and Morone discuss this question at 

Trent 171 

Charles V. lands at Savona (May 24th) and is invited 

to a conference with the Pope . . . .172 
Difficulties caused by the Emperor — the Pope leaves 

Bologna on June the nth 173 

And reaches Busseto on the 21st . . , .174 
Negotiations with the Emperor . . . -. • ^75 
The Milanese question again a difficulty . . .176 
Charles V. makes an emphatic speech before the 

Sacred College (June 24th) . . . . i77 
No agreement come to on the conciliar question . 178 
Discussions at Trent on the question of a translation 

or suspension of the Council . . . -179 
A suspension is decided upon in consistory of July 

the 6th 181 

And permission given to the prelates to leave Trent . 18 1 
Renewed tension between the Pope and Charles V. . 182 
Tactful attitude of Francis I. , , . .183 



1543 The Emperor enters into an alliance with Henry VIII. 184 
The Pope will not move from his neutrality , and sends 

(November) Cardinal Farnese to Charles and 
Francis . . . . . . . .185 

Altercation between the Pope and the Cardinal of 

Burgos (December 19th) . . . #.186 

1544 Farnese goes first to France and then to the Emperor, 

with whom he enters Worms on January the 25rd 1 87 
Painful interview of Farnese with Charles V. .188 
Total failure of the mission — Farnese leaves Worms 189 
Resolutions of the Diet at Spires — concessions to the 

Protestants (June-July) ..... 190 
Result of Farnese's mission to France . . .191 
Exasperation of the Imperialist party in Rome . .192 
Undisturbed calm of Cardinal Farnese . . '193 
Cardinal d'Este arrives in Rome (June gth) as ambas- 
sador from France . . . . . •193 
The Pope still clings to his policy of neutrality . .194 
Measures taken in consistory (July 30th) with respect 

to the Recess of Spires . . . . -195 
Brief of remonstrance addressed to Charles V. (August 

24th) 196 

Who refuses to receive the Legate . . . .198 
The peace of Crespy between Charles and Francis 

(September) . . . . . . .199 

Charles V. feels that in the Recess he had agreed to 

more "than he could be responsible for" . . 200 
His statesmanship — renewal of diplomatic relations 

with the Pope (November) . . . .201 

The nomination of Cardinals on December the 19th . 202 



1541 Spread of the authority of the Schmalkaldic League . 204 

1542 Apostasy of the Archbishop of Cologne in opposition 

to his cathedral chapter ..... 205 

1543 Overthrow by the Emperor of the Duke of Cleves 

(September) ,,.,., 206 




1544 Results of this victory — the secret clauses of the 

peace of Crespy . . . . . .207 

Nuncios sent to the Emperor and the King of France 

about the holding of the Council (October) . 208 
Removal of the suspension of the Council (November 
, 19th), which is summoned for March the 15th, 

1545 209 

1545 Conciliar Legates appointed (February 6th) . . 210 
Their powers — entry into Trent (March 13th) . .211 
Not many prelates arrive . . . . . .212 

Tortuous policy of the Emperor regarding the Council 2 1 3 

■ Violent pamphlet by Luther (March) . . .215 

The "Scholia" of Calvin and addresses of Sleidan . 216 

Difificulties of the situation 217 

Mission of Cardinal Farnese . . . . .218 

Who arrives at Trent on April the 25th . . . 219 
Delay in opening the Council . . . . .219 

Anxieties of Farnese's journey ..... 220 

His experiences in traversing Protestant states . . 221 
He arrives at Worms on May 17th and has an 

audience of the Emperor . . . . .222 

Evasive answers of Charles V. and Granvelle . . 223 
The proposal to use armed force against the Protestants 224 
Opinion of the nuncios about this plan . . .224 
Farnese returns (May 28th) to Rome to bring the 
compact between the Pope and Charles V. to a 
conclusion . . . . . . .225 

Paul in, is prepared to give extensive help . . 225 
And orders preparations to be made for war . .226 
Difificulties spring up and the undertaking is post- 
poned . . . . . . . .227 

Andelot's announcement about the Council and the 

war . . . . . . . . .228 

Painful surprise of the Pope 228 

The plan of conferring Parma and Piacenza upon Pier 

Luigi Farnese . . . . . . .229 

Opposition of the Emperor and some of the Cardinals 230 
But Pier Luigi is invested with these cities (August 

26th) 232 

Opinions of Cardinals Gonzaga and Carafa . . 233 
The Pope's proposals to the Emperor about the 

Council (September 13th) . .... 235 
Interviews of the nuncios with Charles V. (October) . 236 
Decision in consistory to open the Council . . 237 
The Schmalkaldic League capture Duke Henry of 

Brunswick . . , , , . .238 


A.D. i'AGE 

1545 Brief for the opening of the Council sent to the 

Legates (December 7th) 238 



1545 The Council solemnly opened on December the 13th 240 
Principal members of the Council present . . . 242 
The important question " dogma or reform first " at 

the first Congregation — suggestion by the French 
prelates 244 

1546 Discussions on procedure and on the title of the 

Council ........ 245 

Election of the conciliar officials (January) . . 247 

Impressive exhortation from the Legates read at the 

second session (January 7th) .... 248 
Renewed discussion on the title of the Council . 249 

The Pope wishes decisions on dogma to precede 

measures of reform . . . . . '250 
Resistance to this from the Imperialists . . .251 
It is decided to deal with both questions simul- 
taneously . .252 

But matters of faith to be considered of primary 

importance ....... 254 

Attitude of the Protestants. Death of Luther 

(February i8th) 256 

Charles V. and the Protestants . .... 257 
Intrusion of the Imperial policy into the procedure of 

the Council (April) ...... 258 

Discussion and decrees on the canon of Holy Scripture 

(April 8th) 259 

The Council at work — the Bull "Superni dispositione" 261 
Discussion on the reform of the Episcopate and the 

Dataria ........ 26;^ 

Approbation of decrees published at the fourth session 264 
Debate on reform of the pulpit (May) . . . C65 
And on original sin and the Immaculate Conception . 266 
Dogmatic decree on these subjects (June) . . . 267 
Decrees on reform . . . . . . .268 

The Emperor wishes dogmatic decrees to be omitted 269 
Ambassadors from France arrive at Trent (June 26tli) 270 
"Justification" to be discussed in the sixth session . 271 
Unforeseen difificulties suddenly arise . . ,271 
VOL. xn. d 






Growing organization of the Schmalkaldic League . 272 
Stubborn refusal of the Protestants to attend the 

Council . . . . . . . .273 

1545 The Emperor proposes an offensive alliance with the 

Pope against the Protestants . . . .273 
Difficulties in drawing up the articles of this alliance . 274 
Anxiety of the Emperor at the aggressions of the 

Protestants . . . . . . •275 

Protracted negotiations with the Pope (December) . 276 
Various tendencies at the Imperial court . . .277 

1546 Charles V. allows (January 27th) another religious 

conference to begin at Ratisbon . . .278 

Attitude of the Protestants towards this . . .279 
Proceedings at the conference — the speeches on both 

sides . 280 

The Protestants recall their representatives (March 

20th) and publish two memoirs against the Council 281 
Charles V. arrives at Ratisbon (April loth) . .282 
He is suspected of playing a double game . . 282 

The instructions of his envoy to Rome — irritation of 

the Pope 283 

Perverse schemes of Cardinal Accolti . . .284 
The quarrel between Rome and Florence . . . 285 
Despite the appearances to the contrary, the Emperor 

really wishes for war against the Protestants . 286 
The negotiations at Ratisbon (May) .... 287 

The treaty signed (June) ...... 288 

Conditions of the alliance ..... 289 

It is sent to Rome for the Pope's ratification (June) . 290 
Opposition by some of the Cardinals — the treaty 

signed by Paul III. on June the 26th . . 291 

The Emperor's description of the situation . . 292 

His tactics — incapacity of the Schmalkaldic League . 293 
Operations of the leaders of the League . . . 294 
Lack of unity among the Protestants . . . .295 

Arrival of the Papal troops in Germany (August) . 296 
Extreme caution of Charles V. ..... 297 

Break up of the Schmalkaldic forces and their retreat 

(November) ....... 298 

Charles V.'s belief in toleration leads to breaches of 

amity with the Holy See 299 




1546 Barriers to a permanent understanding between the 

Pope and the Emperor ..... 300 

Complaints of Charles V. . . . . . .301 

The Pope's distrust is not unjustified. Cardinal 

Farnese's audience with the Emperor (August 


Disappointment of the Pope and of the Farnese family 
The Fathers at Trent fear an attack from the Protes 

tant troops ...... 

But the Pope will not allow the sessions to be sus 

pended (July) ...... 

The proposal for a removal of the Council 
Excited discussion on this at Trent (July 28th) . 
Violent outburst of the Imperialist prelates 
Irritation of the Emperor at the proposal (August) 
The Bull authorizing a translation of the Council if 

necessary ....... 

In the meanwhile the Council to continue its labours 
Indignation of the Pope at the attitude of Charles V. 
Fresh instructions sent to the Legates (August 17th) 
Futility of the negotiations .... 

Remarks of the Pope to the ambassador Vega (Sep 

tember) ....... 

Difficulties of the question of the translation 

The proposition that the Pope should suspend the 

Council (October 9th) .... 
The matter to be left to the Council's own decision 
Reply of the Legates on the question (October 25th) 
Declaration of Charles V. in his instructions to 

Mendoza ....... 

Effect of the Spanish supremacy in Italy . 

The Gonzaga and Pier Luigi Farnese— conflict be 

tween Papal and Imperial interests 
Altercation between the nuncio Verallo and Granvelle 

(November 12th) ..... 
The Pope deeply hurt, but still desires peace 
The danger of his being drawn into the strife between 

Charles V. and Francis I. . 
What had been gained by the great sacrifices made by 

Paul III. ? 

Violations by the Imperialists of the treaty with the 






















1546 Disloyal agreement with the Protestant Estates . .327 
The Pope determines to refuse the renewal of the treaty 328 

1547 Brief to the Emperor (January 22nd) announcing the 

recall of the Papal forces . . . . .328 
Verallo's audience with the Emperor (February 2nd) . 330 
Anger and violent behaviour of Charles V. . • 331 
Calculated purpose of his threats . . . •332 
Firmness and dignity of the Pope .... 333 

Aim of the French policy 333 

Design of Ferrante Gonzaga ..... 334 
Death of Henry VIII. (January 28th), and project of 

the Pope for the recovery of England . •335 

Renewed anger of Charles V. , . . . '336 
Unexpected measure of the translation of the Council 

from Trent ....... 336 



1546 Cardinal Farnese endeavours to bring about an agree- 

ment between the Papal and Imperialist interests 

in the Council (November) 
Points upon which an agreement is reached 
But Charles V. refuses this (December) 

1547 The sixth solemn session (January 13th) — its import 


Discussion of the decree of justification 
Conferences of theologians on the subject . 
Publication of the decree — its contents 
Satisfaction of the Pope. Rejoinder to the Imperial 

policy (January 30th) received by Mendoza 
Seventh session — discussion and decree on the Sacra 

ments ....... 

The reform decree (February 26th-28th) . 

Outbreak of an epidemic in Trent 

Discussion on the suspension or translation of the 

Council ....... 

Decision (March nth) in favour of translation to 

Bologna ....... 

On the following day the majority of the Fathers leave 










1547 The Pope gives his consent to the translation 

(March 25th) . . . . . . .355 

Charles V, expresses his extreme displeasure . •356 
Declaration by Paul III. to the Imperial ambassador . 357 
The Emperor takes the field against the Elector of 
Saxony (April) — angry remarks to the nuncio 

Verallo 358 

The Elector defeated at Miihlberg and taken prisoner 359 
This is followed (June 19th) by the submission of 

Philip of Hesse ....... 360 

Efforts of Cardinal Farnese to compose the differences 

between the Pope and the Emperor . . • 361 
The misaion of Cardinal Sfondrato, who meets the 

Emperor on July the 4th ..... 363 

All the Legate's proposals are refused. Charles V.'s 

continued discourtesy ..... 365 

Memorial sent by Sfondrato to Rome (July 31st) . 365 
Where his behaviour is strongly criticised . . . 366 
Determmation of the Pope that the Council must 

remain free . . . . . . -367 

But consents to a postponement of the next session, 

fixed for September 15th ..... 36S 

Italian policy of Charles V. Plan of Gonzaga to over- 
throw Pier Luigi Farnese ..... 369 

Conditions of the duchy of Parma-Piacenza . .370 
Ferrante Gonzaga's plot against Pier Luigi . .371 

Who is assassinated at Piacenza on September the loth 372 
Deeply as the Pope feels this calamity, he does not lose 

his composure . . . . . . -373 

And sends Cardinal Cervini (September 13th) to 

Piacenza ........ 374 



1547 The Emperor's conception of religious unity — his 

claims . . . . . . . -375 

Unworthy behaviour of the Imperialists towards the 

Pope and Cardinal Sfondrato (September) . . 376 

The Legate's interview with Charles V. and with 

Granvelle . . . . . . . .377 

The Emperor and Ottavio Farnese . . , 1378 

Colourless replies of the Emperor to the Legate . 380 



1547 No steps are taken to punish the murderers of Pier 

Luigi 381 

Firmness of the Pope and dignity of his conduct . 381 

His address in consistory on the murder . . . 382 

Troops collected together in Rome .... 383 
Negotiations for an alliance between France and the 

Pope 384 

Rumours of an attack on Rome — the Pope looks on 

all sides for support (November) . . . 385 

Negotiations with Genoa, Venice, and France . . 386 

Charles V. opens the Diet at Augsburg (September ist) 386 

The situation in Germany ...... 387 

Difficulties by which Charles V. is confronted . . 388 

The affairs of religion in the Diet — division of opinions 389 

The Imperial "resolution" of October the i8th . 390 

The representatives of the towns oppose the Emperor 392 

The conciliar question in the Diet .... 393 

Efforts to browbeat the Pope into subjection to the 

Emperor's will. Cardinal Madruzzo sent to Rome 

(November) 394 

His interview with the Pope ..... 395 

Who consults various Cardinals .... 396 
The opinion of the Fathers at Bologna to be taken 

before a final decision is given . . . -397 

The conditions laid down by the Council at Bologna . 398 
Charles V. expects Pope and Council to bend before 

his will ........ 400 

1548 The Impefial agents appear at the Council (January 

i6th) 401 

The Emperor's protest is presented to the Council . 402 

Rejoinder of the Cardinal-President .... 403 
Declaration by Mendoza to the Pope in consistory 

(January 23rd) ....... 404 

Proposals of the Legates at Bologna .... 405 

Dignified reply of the Pope to Mendoza (February ist) 406 

The Emperor shrinks from the extreme step . . 408 



1548 The long-cherished plan of the Emperor . . . 409 

His new expedient 411 

Astonishment of the Cardinal-Legate, Sfondrato . 412 

Charles V. conscious of the risks he was running . 412 

Table of contents. xxi 


154S The "Interim," or "Declaration ... on the observ- 
ance of reh'gion . . . until the decision of the 
General Council " . . . . . •413 
Private negotiations of the Emperor with each Estate 

in the Diet 415 

Opposition of the Catholic Estates to the Interim . 416 
Concession made to them by the Emperor . -417 

The Imperialist pretensions . . . , .418 
Sfondrato and the Interim . . . . -419 

Endeavours to drive the Pope into the arms of Henry II. 420 
Charles V, and the nuncio Santa Croce . . 421 

The Emperor tries to make the Interim acceptable to 

the Catholic Princes . . . . . .422 

But it meets with growing dislike .... 423 

Charles V.'s scheme of reform for the Catholic clergy . 424 
He takes steps to prevent a combination of the dis- 
contented spirits . . . . . .425 

To outward appearance the Emperor succeeds . .426 
Varied acceptance of the Interim .... 427 

Agitation of the Protestants against the "papistical " 

Interim ........ 428 

Reception of the Interim by Paul III. (May) . . 429 
Should the Council be again transferred? . . -431 

Mission of Dandino to France (June) . . . 432 

And of Pietro Bertano to Charles V. ... 433 

Bertano and Sfondrato received in audience by the 

Emperor (July 2nd) ...... 434 

New dissensions between the Pope and the Emperor. 435 
French mission to restrain the Pope from making con- 
cessions to Charles V. . . . . -435 

Three Legates appointed for Germany (August 31st) . 436 
Uselessness of the Interim. Anxiety of Charles V. . 437 
The decrees of the Diet quite ineffectual . . . 438 
1549 Receptionof the Legates by the Emperor (January 3rd) 439 
The Pope endeavours to satisfy Charles V. . . 44c 
Who still continues unconcihatory . . . • 44^^ 
The missions of Giulio Orsini about Piacenza . . 442 
Nomination of new Cardinals on April the 8th . . 443 
Reply of the Emperor to the demand for Piacenza 

(June i2th) ....... 443 

Astonishment and alarm in Rome .... 444 

Paul III.'s letter to the Emperor .... 445 

Again the project of a Franco-Papal alliance . . 446 
Impossible conditions laid down by Charles V. . . 447 
Invitation to Rome of bishops from Bologna and 

Trent .... . . 4^8 



1549 The French alliance and Ottavio Farnese . . . 449 
Ottavio leaves Rome secretly for Pdrma(October 20th). 

Anger of the Pope .... . 450 
Who is attacked by a violent fever . . .451 

Death of Paul III. on November the loth . . 453 
His burial in St. Peter's. The monument erected 

to him 453 



State of religious affairs in England since 1533 . . 456 

Terrors of the new statutes 457 

1535 Execution of More, Fisher, and others . . . 458 
Indignation throughout Europe . . . -459 
Anger of the Pope. Bull against Henry VIII. (August) 460 
But Charles V. and Francis I. will not interfere. . 461 
Division of opinion in the Sacred College (November) 462 

1536 Death of Queen Catherine, and execution of Anne 

Boleyn 463 

Dissolution of the monasteries ..... 464 
Catholic rising in the north of England. Paul III. 

contemplates sending Pole to Henry VIII. . 465 

1537 And sets great hopes on this mission . . . 466 
Which is, however, a failure. Reasons for this . -467 

1538 The Pope determines on the publication of the Bull 

against Henry VIII. (December 17th) . . 468 
Pole quite unsuccessful in his mission to the Emperor 

and Francis 1 469 

1541 Execution of his mother (May 27th), The confiscated 

monastic property . . . . . .47° 

The obstacles to Henry's reconciliation . . • 47i 

1542 The situation in Scotland. Death of James V. . . 471 

1543 Cardinal Beaton. Mission of Grimani . . . 472 

1546 Murder of Cardinal Beaton (May 29th) . . . 473 

1547 Death of Henry VIII. (January 28th). Action by 

the Pope 474 

Doctrinal standpoint of Henry VIII. . . . 475 

Protestantism of Cranmer and Somerset . . . 47^ 

1542 Spread of heresy in Sweden. Revolt of the peasants 477 

Quelled by Gustavus Wasa . . . .478 




1536 State of the Catholic cause in Denmark. Arrest of the 

bishops ........ 479 

'537 Construction of a new Church system . . . 479 
Inglorious end of the Catholic episcopate. Gradual 

extirpation of the Faith ..... 480 

Lutheranism established in Norway and Iceland . 481 

The heretical movement in France .... 482 

1535 Declaration of Francis I. (January 29th) . , . 483 
His double game. Edict against the Protestants 

(July) 484 

1540 And another, "The Edict of Fontainebleau" (June I St) 485 
Severity dealt out to the French Protestants. The 

Waldensians ....... 486 

Calvin's work, Handbook of Christian Doctrine . .487 



Spread of Lutheranism in Poland .... 
Causes of the failure to expel heresy from the kingdom 
The political situation compels the King to turn to the 

bishops ....... 

Stanislaus Hosius, Bishop of Ermeland 

Protestant propaganda in Italy. Renee, duchess of 

Ferrara . . ..... 

Clemency of Paul III. to those who recant 
Surreptitious character of the Protestant propaganda 
In Venetian territory, Lucca, Modena, and Siena 
Juan Valdes in Naples, 1 532-1 541 . 
Character of his teaching. The " Spirituali " . 
Valdes and his circle. Pietro Martire Vermigli . 

1541 His sermons at Lucca ..... 

1542 He flies from Lucca, and with Ochino leaves Italy 
Spread of Lutheran opinions at Modena . 

The " Accademia " a focus of religious rebellion 
Action by Morone and Contarini ... 
Six Cardinals appointed (July 4th) as Inquisitors 


The Roman Inquisition ..... 
1 547-49 Attitudeof the Italian States towards the Inquisition 














Especially of Naples, Milan, and Venice . . . 510 

1549 Apostasy of Pietro Paolo Vergerio . . . • 511 
Measures to extirpate Lutheran errors, but precipitate 

zeal is little to the liking of Paul III. . . . 512 

An index of forbidden books published . . -513 

Paul III. and the foreign missions . . . • 513 

1534-38 In Ethiopia and the Congo . .... 514 

1534-47 Missions in America; foundation of new sees . 515 

The East Indies. The bishopric of Goa . . • 5 1 7 

1543 The American Indians. Bartolome de las Casas . 518 

The Pope forbids the slavery of the Indians . •519 

His interest in the Armenians and Maronites . .520 

Processes of canonization during the pontificate . 521 

1549 Preparations for a General Jubilee . . . .522 



The Pope, during his cardinalate, a warm friend to men 

of learning . . . . . . -523 

At his accession the Renaissance had passed its 

zenith . . . . . . . .524 

Duality of the character of Paul III.'s patronage of 

letters . . . . . • . • 525 
His first undertaking is the restoration of the Roman 

University. His steps to obtain good professors 526 
Success of the undertaking ..... 527 
Lectures in medicine — teachers of rhetoric . . 528 

Care bestowed by Paul III. in the education of his 

relatives . . . . . • . '529 
Support extended to men of learning by the Farnesi . 530 
Theologians and canonists more in favour with the 

Pope than poets 531 

Poets associated with the reign of Paul III. . •532 
The academies and the popularity of satire , .534 
Pietro Aretino and Niccol5 Franco .... 535 
Paolo Giovio. The physician, Fracastoro, and others 536 
The classical scholar, Manetti . . . . -537 

Giovanni Guidiccioni — Blosius Palladius . . . 538 
Canonists and theologians encouraged by Paul III. . 540 
Eminent Cardinals created during the pontificate . 541 
Paul III. and Erasmus . . . . • .542 

Theologians called to Rome in view of the Council . 543 



1549 Great influence of Spanish divines .... 544 

Paul III. and the Vatican Library .... 545 

Orders search to be made for rare manuscripts . -547 

Increased importance of the custodian of the Library 547 
Many works of this period are dedicated to Paul III. 548 
Copernicus and Paul III. . ..... 549 

"The last great Pope of the Renaissance" . . 550 

Paul III. reassembles in Rome the great artists of the 

Medicean era . . . . . . -55^ 

His support and employment of Michael Angelo . 552 
And of Peruzzi and Antonio da Sangallo . . . 554 
The work of repairing and renewing the fortifications 

of Rome 555 

Sangallo's plan for the new defences . . . -556 
Numerous architects and engineers employed to carry 

these out . . . . . . . -557 

Description of the works . . . . . -558 

Fortification of j^e Leonine city .... 560 

Paul III. appomts L. G. Manetti to take charge of 

the antiquities of Rome ..... 563 
Notwithstanding this, acts of destruction are still 

continued ........ 565 

Betterment of the conditions of the Roman streets . 566 
Construction of new thoroughfares . . . .567 

Reconstruction of the Capitol ..... 569 

Vlagnificence of Michael Angelo's plan for this work . 572 
Extensive restorations and embellishments in the 

Vatican . . . . . . . • 573 

The Cappella Paolina and the Sala Regia . . .574 

Decorative work in the castle of St. Angelo . .575 

1535-46 Construction of the Farnese palace . . . 579 

1546 And that of S. Marco ...... 583 

1544 Restoration of various churches .... 5S5 

And of fortifications of towns in the States of the 

Church . . . . . . . .586 

1540-43 The new fortress of Perugia .... 587 

Embellishment of Orvieto . . . . .588 

Work at Viterbo and Frascati . . . . .589 

And other works of general utility .... 590 

Construction of the " Cava Paolina " . . . '591 
Buildings by Pier Luigi Farnese at Nepi and Caprarola 592 
Work of Vignola at Castro, the Vatican, and 

Bologna 593 

Place held by sculpture under Paul III. . . . 594 
Almost all the sculptors employed are Tuscans . . 594 
Renown of and homage paid to Michael Angelo » 595 



The minor arts and handicrafts .... 596 

But few relics of these are now in Rome . . . 597 

Coins and medals of Paul III 598 

Benvenuto Cellini and Leone Leoni .... 599 

Cesati, Marmitta, Belli, and Cherubino . . . 600 
Work executed by Perino del Vaga . . . .601 

The " Congregazione Ponteficia dei Virtuosi al 

Pantheon" . . . . . . .601 

Visits of Titian to Rome in 1543 and 1545- Daniele 

da Volterra ....... 603 

Frescoes by Vasari at the Cancelleria . . . 604 
And by del Vaga and others. The illuminators, 

Raimondi and Clovio. Work by Pastorino . 608 
1536 Michael Angelo begins the fresco of The Last Judg- 
ment in the Sixtine Chapel (April-May) . . 609 
1 54 1 Which is finished and solemnly uncovered on the eve 

of All Saints . 612 

Extraordinary impression made by the fresco . .612 
But it also meets with criticism '. . . .614 

Invectives of Aretino . . . . . .615 

And censure by Lodovico Dolce and others . .617 
Decision of the Congregation of the Council of 
January the 21st, 1546, on pictures. This is 
carried out by Daniele da Volterra . . .618 
Repeated repainting of parts of the fresco. . .619 
Composition and design of the fresco . . .621 
Influence of Dante upon the genius of Michael 

Angelo 627 

And his deviation from conventional usage . .629 
Michael Angelo undertakes the decoration of the 

Cappella Paolina . . . . . '631 

Subjects of the frescoes in the chapel . . . 633 

The monument to Julius II. at last terminated . . 634 
The last great work of Michael Angelo : the rebuilding 

of St. Peter's ....... 635 

1535-44 Measures taken by the Pope to raise the necessary 

funds ........ 636 

1544 Discovery of the sarcophagus of Maria, wife of 

Honorius ........ 638 

The plan and model by Sangallo of the new building 639 
Michael Angelo's criticism of this .... 640 

1546 On the death of Sangallo, Michael Angelo is ap- 
pointed . . . . . . . .641 

And Paul III. grants him unrestricted powers . . 642 
Attacks on Michael Angelo by the partisans of 

Sangallo •643 



1549 Mohi propria by the Pope in support of Michael 

Angelo ........ 644 

Who makes the fullest use of the freedom guaranteed 

to him ........ 645 

And makes a model of his plan .... 646 

The dome of St. Peter's 647 

Importance of the Pope's share in the work done by 

Michael Angelo * . . . , • 648 



I. Pope Paul III. to Baldassare Peruzzi . .651 
11. „ „ to Antonio da Sangallo . .652 

III. „ „ to Francis I., King of France . 653 

IV. List of churches demoUshed in Rome for the 

Emperor's visit 654 

V. Pope Paul III. to Antonio da Sangallo . .655 
VI. „ „ grants to the " Fabbrica" of St. 

Peter's the river Anio . . • -655 
VII. Giovanni dell' Antella to Cosimo I., Duke of 

Florence ... ... 658 

VIII. Cardinal Aleander to Cardinal Alessandro 

Farnese 659 

IX. Nino Sernini to Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga. . 659 

Y ... 660 

XI. Giovanni Ricci to Cardinal Alessandro Farnese 661 

XII. Nino Sernini to Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga . .661 

XIII. Pope Paul III. to Francis I., King of France . 662 

XIV. Nino Sernini to Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga . 662 
XV. Averrardo Serristori to Cosimo I., Duke of 

Florence 663 

XVI. Lattanzio Tolomei to Siena .... 663 
XVII. Cardinal Alessandro Farnese to Giovanni 

Poggio 664 

XVIII. Nino Sernini to Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga . . 665 

XIX. „ „ „ . . 665 

XX. Instruction for Dionysius, Guardian of the 
convent of Sion in Jerusalem, as Visitor of 

the Maronites of Lebanon . . . 666 

XXI. Instruction for M. Grimani, Patriarch of 

Aquileja, as nuncio in Scotland. . . 668 

XXII. Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga to Ferrante Gonzaga 670 

XXIII. „ „ to Monsignor de Rossi 672 


















Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga to the Duke of Ferrara 

Cardinal Farnese to Cardinal Morone 
Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga to Camillo Capilupi . 
„ „ to Ferrante Gonzaga . 

Girolamo Tiranno to Urbino . . . . 

Pope Paul III. to King Ferdinand I. 
Cardinal Morone to Cardinal Madruzzo . 
Pope Paul III. to Antonino Sirleto . 
A. Cattaneo to Cardinal Madruzzo . 
Benedetto Buonanni to Cosimo I., Duke of 
Tuscany ....... 

Uberto Strozzi to Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga 
Cardinal Alessandro Farnese to Camillo Orsini 







Ignatius of Loyola and the Society of Jesus. 

At the very moment when the Church in Italy was 
assuming daily a more and more mundane character, and 
the corrupt elements of the Renaissance were, in the person 
of the Spaniard Alexander VI., degrading the Holy See, 
a man was born in Spain who was destined to contribute 
more powerfully than any other, by the force and the 
unequalled range of his activity, to purify the Church and 
to restore by means of new conquests the balance of her 
recent losses. This was Ignatius of Loyola.^ 

* The chief sources for Loyola's life and works, besides the " Spiritual 
Exercises" and the "Constitutions of the Society of Jesus," which will 
be discussed more fully in the text, are (i) his letters, Cartas de San 
Ignacio de Loyola, in six volumes, published in Madrid, 1874- 1889, 
by Spanish Jesuits. Since 1903 there has appeared (already about 
thirty volumes) in the great authoritative Montimenta Historica 
Societatis Jesu, also published at Madrid under the editorship 
of Spanish Jesuits, a new critical edition which will furnish as 
many letters again : Monumenta Ignatiana, Ser. I., Matriti, igo^ seqq. 
(on two letters falsely ascribed to Ignatius, see Heitz in the Rev. 
d'Hist. Eccles., IX., 47 seq., 506). (2) The "Autobiography" or 
"Confessions." On the solicitation of his disciples Ignatius (t 1556) 
related between 1553 and 1555 some of his experiences to P. Luis 
Gonsalvez de Camara, who in the course of the narration made short 
notes and afterwards dictated all he had heard in full, in Spanish and 
Italian, to his amanuensis. These memoranda appeared in a Latin 
translation in the Acta Sanctorum, Julii, VII. (Antwerpiae, 1 731), 
and, as a separate work. Acta quaedam S. P. Ignatii a LuDOVico 



The Loyola family belonged to the lesser nobility of 
the beautiful Basque country. There, in the province of 
Guipuzcoa, hidden away among mountain solitudes to the 
west of the little town of Azpeitia on the road to Azcoitia, 
stood the cradle of the race, which differed in no respects 
from the other seats of Basque noblemen. The small 

CONSALVO excerpta, in Paris, 1873, in the original tongue in the 
Monumenta Ignatiana, Ser. IV., t. i (Matriti, 1904). The authenticity 
and value of this source has recently been pointed out by Joseph 
SUSTA (Ignatius von Loyolas Selbstbiographie : Eine quellen- 
geschichtliche Studie) in the Mitteilungen des Instituts fiir osterr. 
Geschichtsforschung, XXVI. (1905), 86-106. (3) The Portuguese 
Metnoriale or Diaritim of P. Gonsalvez. This is founded on the 
notes which Gonsalvez took down in Rome day by day from June to 
October 1555 from the answers given to his questions by Ignatius, 
especially concerning private occurrences. In 1573 Gonsalvez put 
all his notes into order and added explanatory remarks ; the first 
copy is in the already named volume of the Monumenta. (4) A more 
important account of Ignatius's life from 1521 to 1547, by the Spaniard 
Diego Laynez, one of his first nine associates and his immediate 
successor in the Generalship, written in Spanish in the form of a letter 
in 1547; published for the first time in 1904 in the same volume of 
the Monumenta. (5) De Vita P. Ignatii et Socieiatis Jesu initiis. 
The Spaniard, Juan de Polanco, who as Secretary of the Order was 
the founder's right-hand man from 1547 up to the death of the latter, 
drew up, but in the last years of his life (+1577), from the numerous 
letters and reports he had received and from his own recollections, a 
Chronicon Societatis Jesu, to serve as a deposit of material for the 
future historian, and afterwards set to work at a life of Ignatius 
extending to the year 1543 but practically only to 1539; both first 
published in the Monumenta Historica (Matriti, 1 894-1 898, 6 vols.); 
cf. Anal. Bolland., XXVI., 487 seq. (6) Vita Ignatii Loiolae, 
Socieiatis Jesu Fundatoris, written by the Spaniard, Pedro de 
Ribadeneira, at the command of Francis Borgia, General of the Order, 
in Latin and also later in Spanish, and founded on his own observation, 
on the autobiography of the saint and that contained in the letter of 
Laynez, finally on the communications collected throughout the whole 
Order about 1567 ; first edition issued at Naples in 1572, that with 


building with its thick walls is only two stories high ; over 
the doorway can be seen in stone the armorial bearings 
of the house of Loyola. In this abode,^ carefully pre- 
served from decay by the pious regard of posterity, at 
the beginning of the ninetieth year of the 15th century .'^ 
Inigo, who was later known as Ignatius,^ first saw the 

important additions by the author himself at Madrid in 1583. 
(7) De vita et moribus Ignatii Loyolae, qui Societatem Jesu fundavit, 
Libri III., auctore Joanne Petro Maffeio, S.J. (Romae, 1585 and 
often since), in Ciceronian Latin, an intelligent use being made of the 
autobiography and other sources {cf. SusTA, loc. cit., 74). (8) Historia 
Societatis Jesu prima pars, auctore NiCOLAO Orlandino, S.J. 
(Romae, 161 5), describing the Generalship of Ignatius from Polanco's 
Chronicon and the letters made use of by the latter ; carefully 
compared with the printed work of Ribadeneira and others who were 
intimate with the founder. Orlandino's skill is recognized by Ranke 
(Papste, III., loth ed., Leipzig, 1900, 114). (9) Delia Vita e dell' Istituto 
di S. Ignatio, Fondatore della Compagnia di Giesii. Libri cinque del 
P. Daniello Bartoli, S.J. (Roma, 1650 and often), written in good 
Italian, with careful employment of his authorities, contains much that 
had been previously overlooked or purposely passed over {cf. Acta 
Sanctorum, Julii, VII., 598, and Analecta Bollandiana, XII. [1894], 
70; XV. [1896], 450, 451). (10) The very copious Commentarius 
praevius to the acts of Ignatius, composed by the Bollandist Joannes 
PlNius, S.J., in the same volume of the Acta Sanctorum. Various 
other sources will be referred to as occasion arises. For GOTHEIN'S 
criticism (Ignatius von Loyola und die Gegenreformation, Halle, 1895), 
cf. Histor. Jahrb., XVII., 561-574, and Anal. Bolland., XV., 449-454 
(see also Susta, loc. cit.). For earlier and more modern biographies 
of the saint, see also Heimbucher, Die Orden und Kongregationeu 
der kathol. Kirche, III., 2nd ed., Paderborn, 1908, 10-12. 

Mt is now enclosed in a wing of the vast Colegio de Loyola, of 
which the lofty-domed church was built by Fontana about 1683. 

2 It is an old controversy whether the birth-year was 1491 or 1495 » 
for the literature on the subject, see Analecta Bollandiana, XIX., 468. 
Recently a plea has been put in for 1492 (Susta, 95). 

' His baptismal saint was not St. Ignatius of Antioch, the disciple of 
the apostles, but a Spanish saint, the Benedictine Abbot, Inigo 


light of day. After a childhood passed in the lonely 
valley, he was taken while yet a lad under the protection of 
a friend of his family, Juan Velasquez, grand treasurer 
to Ferdinand the Catholic, who resided sometimes at 
Arevalo and sometimes at the King's court.^ The boy's 
education did not pass the customary limits of that age ; 
he learned to read and write, and after the death of 
Velasquez he entered military service under the Duke of 
Najera, viceroy of Navarre. He lived as a genuine child 
of the Spanish chivalry of those days, filled with the 
spirit of the Catholic faith, which that chivalry had de- 
fended in centuries of wars against the Moors. Always in 
readiness to deal a blow, rejoicing in the stress of battle, 
and noble of heart, he was in the rest of his conduct far 
from being a saint. Juan de Polanco, afterwards his com- 
panion of long years' standing, relates that in his youthful 
days Ignatius had been a gambler and had had amorous 

Then came a turning-point. Ignatius's life was to take 
a direction which should turn the hot head of the camp 
into a champion of the Church and the Holy See and the 
founder of a new Order. 

(Enecho) of Ona. Up to 1537 he signed himself only Inigo (Mon. 
Ignat., Sen I., 1 , 99, 156, 246) ; from 1537 to 1543 alternately Inigo 
and Ignacio ; from 1543 onwards with one exception we meet only witii 
Ignacio or Ignatius. He seems to have thought erroneously that this 
was synonymous with Inigo {cf. Astrain, I., 2, 3). 

^ FiTA in Boletin de la Real Academia de la Historia, XVII., 
Madrid, 1890, 492-520. 

2 Vita Ignatii Loiolae et rerum Societatis Jesu historia, I., Matriti, 
1894, 10; cf. further evidence in Astrain, I., 13 seq. See also the 
Process in the Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 580-597, which does not, how- 
ever, establish whether the accusation there dealt with, of serious offence 
committed at night with previous intent and by cunning, was justified 
01 not It is also unknown whether a sentence was passed or not. 


When the French were besieging Pampeluna in May 
1521 Ignatius was determined to hold the fortress to the 
last extremity ; nor did it yield before the valiant soldier 
had been severely wounded in the leg.^ lie was conveyed 
to his father's house, and there it was discovered that the 
h'mb had been badly set, and would have to be broken 
again. Ignatius bore the excruciating pain with no other 
sign of suffering than the hard clenching of his fists, but it 
was long before the limb was healed, and in order to while 
away the time the sick man asked for romances of chivalry. 
There were none such in the house, therefore he was given 
a Spanish Lives of the Saints and a translation in the 
same language of the great Vita Christi compiled by 
the Carthusian, Ludolph of Saxony, from the Gospels and 
patristic writings. Ignatius read and pondered the sacred 
story herein narrated. Still, fancies and thoughts of this 
world came back to him again, " For two, three, four hours," 
he relates, " he called before his mind the deeds of valour 
which he wished to perform in honour of a certain lady. 
She was not," he affirmed, " a lady of ordinary nobility, no 
Countess, no Duchess — she was one of still higher rank."^ 
Yet there came hours of reading once more in the doings 
of the saints. " What," he asked himself, " if I were to do 
the deeds of a St. Dominic or a St. Francis?" 

So his moods and plans varied. Thus he acquired this 
experience : mundane thoughts fascinated him, it was true, 
yet in the end they only left his soul parched and discon- 
tented ; but when he purposed to himself to imitate the 
strenuous lives of the saints, he not only found comfort in 
such contemplations themselves, but afterwards felt satis- 

^ Autobiography, n. I, 2 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 38). 

2 Ibid., n. 6 (pp. 40,41). SUSTA (p. 81) makes the not altogether 
inconceivable suggestion that Ignatius means here a princess in 
genere^ an imaginary and ideal personage. 


faction and joy. He came gradually to fix his mind on 
this contrast, and perceived that in the one case he was 
moved by an evil spirit and in the other by a good.^ 

Finally, the thoughts of religion prevailed. They took 
possession of his whole soul ; he determined to be God's 
knight and not the world's. In order to strengthen this 
resolution he copiad, as far as his strength permitted him, 
in ornamental lett^s, an extract from Ludolph's Vita Christi 
into an exercise book ; even then, as Laynez ^ assures us' 
he had a special devotion for the mother of our Lord. 

Cured at last, he broke away from his family, determined 
to emulate the great deeds of the saints. He made a 
pilgrimage to the great Catalonian shrine of Our Lady of 
Montserrat. There in the rugged mountain wilderness he 
withdrew, a prey to deep contrition, into seclusion with 
a Benedictine monk and during three days poured forth 
the penitential avowals of his past. On the night of the 
Annunciation he held a vigil after knightly fashion before 
the time-honoured miraculous picture of Our Lady in the 
conventual church. He wore a rough garment of penance 
— a cord round his loins and a pilgrim's staff in his hand ; 
SMTord and dagger he hung up by the altar ; his knightly 
apparel he bestowed on a beggar.^ 

In order to escape observation and remain in complete 
concealment he now bent his steps to the neighbouring 
small town of Manresa, where he was received into the 

* Autobiography, n. 6-10 (pp. 40-42). 

2 Letter of P. Diego Laynez, S.J., on Ignatius, to Polanco, dat. 
Bologna, June 17, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., loi). 

3 Autobiography, n. 16-18 (pp. 46-48). The sword was afterwards 
placed in the Church of Nuestra Senora de Bel^n in Barcelona and is 
still there (see Creixell, 145-160). Recently, on insufficient grounds, 
its authenticity has been disputed, see Revista Montserratina, I. (1907X 

1 30 iCC] 


hospital. In spiritual exercises he was as yet unversed; 
outward acts of penance seemed to him the one and only 
standard of holiness.^ He led accordingly the most austere 
life, begged his bread, fasted all the week except on Sunday, 
and three times a day gave himself the discipline ; every 
week he made his confession and received the sacrament 
of the altar; daily he attended Mass and vespers; every 
night he rose from his bed to pray and daily passed seven 
hours on his knees in prayer;' the principal scene of his 
prayers and penitential exercises was a cave near the city.^ 
No wonder that by the end of the year Ignatius was 
seriously ill. Pious women in the higher ranks of life 
tended him in their homes, but he determined to change 
his dwelling, and in clothing and living to approximate 
more nearly to the customary ways of men.* 

For the first four months he felt an inward joy that 
was almost without a cloud, but then came bitterest 
anguish and conflicts of the soul. Once he resolved 
neither to eat nor drink again until he had found peace. 
He persevered for a whole week, and only the command 
of his confessor availed to make him take some nourish- 
ment at last. His director also calmed him when he 
wished again and again to confess sins already laid bare. 
Peace returned once more, and his heart rejoiced in God.^ 

Great illumination ensued. God treated him, as Ignatius 
himself expressed it, "exactly as a schoolmaster treats a 

* Letter of Laynez (see supra, p. 6, n. 2). 

2 Autobiography, n. 19-23 (pp. 48-51); letter of Laynez, 102; 


* Cueva Santa, above which afterwards the Church of St. Ignatius 
was built {cf. PiNiUS, Comment, praev., n. 49-53 ; Acta Sanctorum, 
Julii, VII. ; ASTRAiN, 33-34). 

* Autobiography, n. 32-34 (pp. 55, 56). 

5 Ibid., n. 20-25 (pp. 49-52) ; letter of Laynez, 103. 

B History of the popes. 

child whom he is teaching." ^ He bestowed upon him the 
gift of contemplative prayer. Often, so he confidently 
stated at a later time, " he thought to himself that even if no 
Holy Scriptures had been given us to teach us the truths 
of faith he would nevertheless have determined to give up 
life itself for them, solely on account of what he had seen 
with the soul." 2 To his bosom friend Laynez he said, 
in speaking of the days at Manresa, that once in the 
neighbourhood of the city he had learned more in the 
course of an hour than all the sages of the world could 
have taught him.^ It was by the river Cardoner; Ignatius 
had sat down on the brink and was gazing into the stream ;* 
many of the things then made known to him swept across 
his vision at a later day when he came to found his Order.^ 
In this sense it may be said that Manresa was the birth- 
place of the Society of Jesus. But that Ignatius then knew 
clearly and certainly that he was to be the founder of such 
an Order is a subsequent tradition which does not admit of 
proof. As the most recent sources of information made 
public show, Ignatius and those in his confidence spoke in 
a very different fashion.^ 

While still at Manresa Ignatius led many to a change 

* Autobiography, n. 27 (p. 53). 

2 Ibid.^ n. 28-31 (pp. 53-55) ; letter of Laynez, 103-104. 

2 Memoranda of P. Ribadeneira, De Actis Patris Nosiri Ignatii^ 
apparently previous to the first appearance of his Life of Ignatius and 
therefore prior to 1572 (see supra, p. 2, note; first published in the 
Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 337-393 ; see ibid., n. i). 

* Autobiography, n. 30, 31 (pp. 54, 55); Bartoli (see supra, p. 3, 
note), I., I, n. 14. 

* So asserts P. Jeronimo Nadal, Loyola's right hand in Rome 
(Epistolae P. Hieronymi Nadal, IV., Matriti, 1905, 652). Cf. also 
P. Luis Gonsalvez in his Memoriale (see supra, p. 2, note), n. 137 
(Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., p. 220). 

* See infra, p. 31 seq. 


of life by giving them "spiritual exercises."^ This was 
the origin of the little book written simply and intelligibly, 
with the utmost brevity and compression of style, which 
belongs to the most remarkable books of mankind — the 
Book of the Exercises, — not that it was written down at 
one stroke. Ignatius himself replied to the question of 
Gonsalvez: "The Pilgrim — so was Ignatius called in his 
self-confessions — observed in his soul now this, now that, 
and found it profitable ; then, thought he, this might also 
be useful to others, and so wrote it down." Ignatius 
particularly gave it to be understood that the directions 
as to the choice of a vocation and as to the formation of 
resolutions in weighty matters belonged to the time of his 
serious illness at Loyola.^ The rules concerning thinking 
in conformity with the mind of the Church {ad sentiendum 
vere cum ecclesid) were added years afterwards in France 
or Italy. But already in 1547 Laynez had declared that 
Ignatius had made the Exercises his first consideration 
from the early days in Manresa.^ Everything points to the 
probability that there also he wrote out their first draft.* 

The Book of the Exercises calls for a closer examination. 
The contents are divided into four " weeks." Each week 
can be curtailed or lengthened at need. The indispensable 
foundation of the whole work is formed by the aim and 
end of man. " Man was created that he might praise God 
our Lord, show Him reverence, and serve Him, and by so 

1 POLANCUS, Vita, c. 3 (p. 25). 

^ Autobiography, n. 99 (L. 97). 

' Letter, 103. 

♦ RiBADENEiRA, Vita, I., 7, c. 8 {cf. supra, p. 2, note), in the edition 
Vita Ignatii Loiolae ... a Petro Ribadeneira , . . conscripta, 
Ingolstadii 1590, 30; ASTRAIN, 149; H. WatriGANT, S.J., La 
Genesedes Exercises de St. Ignace de Loyola. Extrait des Etudes. 
Reproduction avec pieces et notes complementaires, Amiens, 1897, 


doing save his soul. All other creatures upon earth were 
created for the sake of man and to help him to reach his 
goal. It therefore follows that man must use these 
creatures so far as they help him to this goal, and abstain 
from them so far as they hinder him from attaining it." If 
he does not thus act, he sins. The meditations of the first 
week awaken a horror of sin and a dread of its consequences. 
The soul cleanses herself by confession ; she breaks her 
fetters, reaches the true freedom of the children of God, 
and presses on with all her strength to her Creator. For 
no man can there be any other way than the imitation of 
Christ, which for Ignatius was his life's ideal, one which he 
pursued with the sincerity and strength of will peculiar 
to him. 

In the first meditation of the second week Christ 
appears as the God-sent heavenly King ; He must rule 
over all hearts, and therefore extend His sway over the 
whole world; He calls upon all to enlist in His army, and 
places Himself at the head of His loyal troops. All true 
souls cleave to Him closely. Following the steps of the 
Evangelists, the meditations now accompany the Saviour 
through all the passages of his life, with frequent prayers 
to the Heavenly Father that grace may be given to know 
and to love the Redeemer more, and to be more faithful to 
His example.^ Here the right moment has arrived to 
make a choice of vocation. The Exercises offer a wise and 
searching introduction to the treatment of this momentous 
question; at the same time they serve as the pole-star for 
any important decision in life, whether such be ma^e in 
the Exercises or in the world without. Now, in the 
Exercises, all, whom a choice of vocation no longer con- 
cerns, must in their several stations " reform themselves." 

* Second week, first day, first and second meditation ; third pre- 
lude, fifth meditation. 


Ignatius makes it perfectly clear that this is a question not 
merely for priests and religious, but those also whom God 
calls to wedlock, to power, and to riches. 

Every man in his calling and position must, by living 
faith and practical love, participate in the work of Christ's 
kingdom. That is the ultimate goal of the Exercises. In 
order to attain to it the meditation on the two standards 
{ducB vexillce), that of Lucifer and that of Christ, shows 
us with complete perspicuity the contrast between the 
ruinous principles of the evil spirit and the principles of 
Christian perfection as taught by Christ. Two other 
meditations keep the same aim in view, that of calling forth 
strong and effectual resolutions ; one deals with the " three 
classes of men," the other with the three grades or " modes " 
of humility. The third week, devoted to the sufferings of 
our Lord, confirms the penitent in his renunciation of evil 
and in his wholesome resolves. The fourth is a rapturous 
meditation on the risen and glorified Son of God.^ 

The meditations are interspersed with various counsels 
and rules of life which, like the directions for making a 
choice, are serviceable not merely for periods of contempla- 
tion but for the whole course of life : such for instance are 
the rules for the "discernment of spirits"; for the treat- 
ment of scruples; for the right expenditure of income; for 
moderation in food, drink, and sleep ; for the practice of 
meditation, examination of conscience, and other forms of 
prayer ; for the duty of mental obedience to the Church. 
These last especially are worth their weight in gold.^ At 
their head stands the primary maxim : " We must be ready 

* C/; M. Meschler, S.J., Die Aszese des hi. Ignatius : Stimmen 
aus Maria Laach, LXXV. (1908), 269-280, 387-399. 

2 Cf. Les Ragles du pur Catholicisme selon St. Ignace de Loyola 
per Le P. Maurice Meschler, S.J. : Collection de la Bibliotheque 
des Exercices de St. Ignace, Enghien, 1907, n. 7. 


to renounce from our heart our private judgment, to obey 
in all things the bride of Christ, and this bride is that Holy 
Mother the Church." We must, he says further, exhort to 
frequent confession, communion, and attendance at Mass, 
not forgetting also prayer in choir, religious vows, the 
veneration of relics, pilgrimages, indulgences, rules of 
fasting and abstinence, exercises of penance ; and these not 
only in their inward but also in their external practice. 
We must also praise the building and adornment of churches 
and the veneration shown to sacred images and pictures. 
Above all ought we to praise the precepts of the Church, 
always defending her teaching and never opposing it. We 
should always be more ready to praise than to blame the 
statutes and conduct of those set over us as superiors, even 
if the persons themselves should not always be praiseworthy, 
"since to attack them in sermons or in intercourse with the 
common people would be more likely to give rise to mur- 
murings and scandals than to edification." In speaking of 
the predestination of men, of faith, and of grace such ex- 
pressions should be avoided as are likely to cool the zeal 
of the faithful for good works.^ The holy fathers should 
be read diligently, yet without depreciation of the scholastic 
teachers.2 With great emphasis Ignatius insists on the 
duty of the unconditional surrender of the understanding 
to the judgment of the Church led by the Holy Spirit.^ 
The Spiritual Exercises close in the contemplation of the 
divine love which finds expression in a striking prayer of 
absolute self-surrender to God. 

* Rule, 14-17. 

2 Rule, II. C. MiRBT (Ignatius von Loyola, Histor. Zeitschr., 
LXXX., 68) thinks notwithstanding that it cannot be proved that 
Ignatius "felt driven to test the substance of his belief by Scripture 
and Church doctrine." 

f Rule, 13. 


One who has no knowledge of a spiritual world, to whom 
the power of prayer is a negligible quantity, and in whose 
scheme of life there is no room for the inroads of grace, 
can neither fully grasp the meaning of this book nor 
explain its effects. Besides this the Exercises were intended 
to be gone through and not merely read. Their object has 
been described as the attainment of that tranquillity of soul 
which consists in the annihilation of the personal v.'ill, the 
surrender of volition. On the other hand, a non-Catholic 
scholar has recently pointed out with truth that, as a 
matter of experience, those who have gone through the 
Exercises and are to this day going through them, have 
received moral forces which previously they had not 
possessed. The effect of the Exercises is not to weaken 
but to intensify and strengthen personality. They are the 
masterpiece of" a sapient educational system."^ 

Ignatius himself called his book " Spiritual exercises 
whereby a man may be enabled to conquer himself and so 
order his life that he is never under the domination of any 
inordinate affection whatever." ^ Thus prayer is not to 

* Die Geistlichen tJbungen des Ignatius von Loyola : Eine psycho- 
logische Studie, von Prof. Dr. Karl Holl, Tubingen, 1905, I., 2, 35. 
Holl is in conflict with widespread opinions which GOTHEIN (p. 235 seg.) 
also shares. The strong opponent of the Jesuits, JOH. HUBER (Der 
Jesuitenorden, Berlin, 1873, 25), admits on the whole that Ignatius 
in the Exercises shows "a great knowledge of the human heart" 
and " proves himself to have deep insight as a teacher of Christian 

2 " Exercicios espirituales para veneer i. si mismo, y ordenar su 
vida, sin determinarse por afeccion alguna que desordenada sea." Title 
of Anotaciones at the beginning of the book (Exercicios espirituales de 
S. Ignacio de Loyola, Barcelona, 1892, 26). The Exercises were 
written in Spanish, yet he himself often made use of a Latin transla- 
tion. The book, especially in the Latin rendering, has often been 
printed since 1 548, but mostly for members of the Order only. There is 
a list of editions in C SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la Compagnie 


him an end in itself. He will not merely teach men 
prayer as such, he will rather offer them a selection of 
reflections, readings, oral prayers, examinations of con- 
science, exercises, penance, which in a determined sequence 
and combination shall lead up to the point when, as the 
book itself says, "a man may set himself free from all 
inordinate affections and, having done so, seek for and find 
the will of God in conformity with which to rule his life 
and secure the salvation of his soul." ^ Through abundant 
prayer and works of spiritual and corporal penance he 
seeks to receive the grace of heaven ; with this grace the 
whole man, under the guidance of a wise director,^ enters 
into co-operation. Memory, supported by the power of 
imagination, places before the soul ^ the doctrines and facts 
of revelation, especially those contained in Holy Scripture ; 
the internal and the external correspond ; for the daily 
work of life are substituted loneliness and silence ; yet all 
this is only a means to an end. The central activities are 
those of the understanding and the will ; the truths of 

de Jesus, nouv. 6d., Bibliographic, V., Bruxelles- Paris, 1894, 59-74 ; 
IX., 1900, 608, 609. C/. also Heimbuchf.r, III., 2nd ed., 28, n. 2. 
A new critical edition will appear in the Monumenta Ignatiana (cf. 
Ser. I., I., 7, 8). The original autograph copy of the Exercises has not 
been preserved ; on the other hand, the Spanish copy, written in an 
unknown hand and containing some thirty alterations in Ignatius's own 
writing, still exists. A photographic reproduction by Danesi in Rome, 

^ Anotaciones, n. i {/oc. ct'f., 9, 10). 

2 Idici., n. 2, 6, 7, 17, and so forth, fhe necessity of such direction 
is strongly insisted on in the Directorhon — an introduction or key to 
the Spiritual Exercises which was taken in hand by order of a General 
Congregation of the Society in 1558 and after much consultation was 
drawn up in its final form in 1599 by the General, Claudius Aquaviva 
(Directorium Exercitiorium spiritualium, c. 2, n. 6, 7 : Institutum 
Societatis Jesu, III., Flor., 1893, 510). 

8 Exercises. Second week, second meditation, first point. 


faith are to be weighed calmly and then applied to the 
action or inaction of the individual life. 

Reasonable reflection, independent calculation, mag- 
nanimous resolves going into all the details of life, that it 
is which Ignatius requires. What have I done for Christ ? 
What am I doing for Him? What do I intend to do for 
Him?i Fear and shame, admiration and gratitude, trust 
and a generous and enthusiastic love must be called forth and 
the whole character possessed by such sentiments. The 
master of the Exercises must take care that this possession 
be not distorted into a morbid excitement, that zeal be 
not too precipitate. He must give warning against rash 
and inconsiderate vows,^ must prevent injury to health 
from austerities of penance and, however holy the religious 
life may be, must not recommend it while the Exercises 
are in progress. Now is the time " when the Creator and 
the creature, the creature and the Creator, must deal 
together alone without the mediation of man."^ 

In the preface which was prefixed in 1548* to the first 
impression of the Exercises, the author says that he had 
drawn his material not so much from books as from his 
own inner experiences and the knowledge acquired in 
directing the souls of others. The literary sources of the 
Spiritual Exercises have been industriously explored. It 

* Anotaciones, n. 2 and 5. First week, first meditation, first point 
and colloquy. Directorium, c. 8, n. I ; c. 9, n. 4, 5, 9-1 1 ; c. 34, n. 1-3. 

* GOTHEIN (p. 239) asserts incorrectly that Ignatius declares all 
vows taken during the Exercises to be invalid. Such a declaration, 
moreover, would have been powerless as being contrary to the laws of 
natural and Christian morality 

' Anotaciones, n. 14, 15, 18. First Week, tenth addition. 

* Exercitia spiritualia S. P. Ignatii de Loyola, Romae, 1S70, xvi- 
xvii ; cf. also Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 511. See also Hettinger's 
fine work, Die Idee der geistl. Cbungen nach dem Plane der hi. 
Ignatius, 2nd ed., Regensburg, 1908} see also IlEiiiEucnFR, 28 3». 


is probable that while at Montserrat, Ignatius had becocne 
acquainted with the Ejercitatorio de la vida espiritual 
which Garcia de Cisneros, nephew of Cardinal Ximenes 
and first Abbot of the reformed Benedictine convent of 
Montserrat, had composed for the use of his community 
and had had printed there in 1500.^ From him he may 
have borrowed the title of his book and even some of its 
details.^ Cisneros himself, to all appearance, was largely 
indebted to the writings of two Netherlanders, " Brothers 
of the Common Life," Gerhard Zerbolt of Zutphen and 
Jan Mombaers, who in their turn again had been influenced 
by St. Bonaventure and others. Ignatius has taken some 
things from the Imitation of Thomas a Kempis and some 
from Ludolph of Saxony's Life of Christ. The meditation 
on the Two Standards is found in part in a mediaeval 
sermon attributed to St. Bernard,^ while the teaching on 
the three degrees of humility has a striking affinity with 
remarks of Savonarola on this subject.* 

But these are only single stones. The building, taken as 
a whole, is a compact and uniform work of art constructed 
on new and original lines,^ In particular, none of the 
writers prior to Ignatius have given such sound and 
thorough instruction on that form of prayer which, in a 
restricted sense, we speak of as meditation. There is an 
entire absence of all emotionalism, he addresses himself to 
the reason and to faith and imparts his teaching in a 
manner fitted for the school of life. 

1 WATRIGANT, 28-31 ; ASTRAIN, 152-160. 

* Cy: J. M, Besse in Rev. d. Questions Historiques, LXI. (1897), 

3 MiGNE, Patr. lat., clxxxiii, 761. For another example from the 
Middle Ages, see Michael, Gesch. des deutschen Volkes, IV., 229. 
' Watrigant, 102 ; cf. ibid., 50-59, jy. 

* HoLL even recognizes this (pp. 4, 5). 


One remarkable phenomenon always remains. Here 
was a soldier, who had learned no more than to read and 
write and had only just said farewell to a life adrift among 
the temptations of the world, who yet was able to compose 
a spiritual work remarkable for inwardness, lucidity, depth, 
and strength. By Ignatius himself and his first disciples 
this was regarded as a special instance of the overruling 
power of the Spirit of God.^ Paul III. handed the book 
over for examination to three theologians, who had full 
permission to amend and to improve, and without altering 
a single word they gave their approbatioP- 

At the request of Francis Borgia, Duke of Gandia, 
Paul III., on 31st July 1548, issued a brief declaring the 
Exercises to be full of piety and holiness ; they had con- 
tributed much to the greatest successes achieved by 
Ignatius and his institution ; he (the Pope) gave his un- 
reserved approval, and urged upon the faithful that they 
should use the work to their own advantage.^ 

Ignatius wished that by means of the Exercises the spirit 
of his Order might be stamped upon the novices. " This 
is our armoury," he used to say ; he did not wish to see any 
other method of prayer observed in the Society.* The 
Exercises were, moreover, the means of bringing to 
him, in 1543, his first German adherent. Peter Canisius, 
then a young man of twenty-two years of age, wrote about 
them from Mayence to a friend : " They taught me to pray 
in spirit and in truth ; I felt new forces, as it were, within 

* Autobiography, n. 27 (pp. 52, 53) ; letter of J. Polancn of Dec. 8, 
1546 (Mon. Ignat., Sen IV., I., 526). 

2 Preface to edition of 1548, p. xvii (see snpra, p. 15, n. 4). The 
testimonials of the three censors are often printed at- ♦he beginning 0/ 
the Exercises {cf. ibid., xvi). 

^ Ibid., xii-xv. 

* Bartoli, I., I, n. 20 {supra, p. 3, nott 

VOL. XII. ' ? 


me; Uifty poured themselves from my soul over my body; 
I was Lt»mpletely transformed into a new man."^ 

The Society of Jesus in all ages has seen in the Exercises, 
and particularly in the meditation on the " Two Standards," 
the pattern of its existence.^ 

Their influence soon spread beyond the limits of the 
Order and was felt by the great spiritual teachers and 
saints of the age : Louis of Granada, John of Avila, 
Ludovicus Blosius of the Order of St. Benedict.^ Gerhard 
Kalckbrenner, Prior of the Carthusians of Cologne, wrote 
on the 31st of May 1543 to one of his brethren, "Such 
a treasure would be worth seeking for even if one had 
to go to the Indies."* The scholastic theologian Joannes 
Cochlaeus rejoiced that "now, once more, a teacher had 
at last arisen who could speak to the heart." ^ Dietrich 
van Heeze, private secretary and confessor to Adrian VI., 
affirmed in 1543 that "he had gained so much from the 
Exercises that he would not give them away were he offered 
the whole world in exchange."^ St. Francis of Sales also 
recommended the Exercises,'^ and St. Charles Borromeo in- 
troduced them among the clergy of the province of Milan.^ 

> Canisii Epistulae, ed. Braunsberger, I., 77. 

2 Orlandinus, Historiae Societatis Jesu, P., I., i, 10, n. 66 {cf. supra, 
p. 3, note) ; Bartoli, I., 2, n. 36 ; PiNius, Comm. praev., n. 344- 
346 ; Chistoph. Genelli, SJ., Das Leben des hi. Ignatius von 
Loyola, Innsbruck, 1848, 123, 124; J. Wieser, S.J., in the Zeitschr. 
fur kathol. Theol., VIII., 85, 87. 

3 Canisii Epistulae, I., 104 ; Bartoli, I., i, n. 18. 

* Cartas y otros cscritos, del B. P. Pedro Fabro, I., Bilbao, 1894 
421, 422. 

fi "Magistri circa affectus" {ibid., 335, 336). 

• POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 55. 

' Trait^ de I'amour de Dieu, I., 12, ch. 8 (CEuvres, V., Annecy, 1894, 

8 Concilium provinciale, IV., p. 23 (Acta Ecclesiae Mediolanensis, 

Mediolani, 1 599, 143, 171). 


All Orders have adopted the custom of going through 
the Exercises at stated periods. " The little volume of 
Exercises of Loyola," says a modern historian, "has 
exercised on his own Order and the Catholic priest- 
hood generally an influence of a powerfully pronounced 
character."^ He might have added that this transforming 
and sanctifying influence has also been felt, and will continue 
to be felt, by laymen in the most varied conditions of life.^ 

Ignatius remained about a year at Manresa. Then the 
craving for occupation drove him, the man of action, again 
into the world. He set out for Palestine, that region of the 
world which, in the Middle Ages, had been the magnet of 
so many crusaders. Wearing the garb of the poorest 
pilgrim, he sailed from Barcelona to Gaeta and from there 
made the journey to Rome ; he set foot, for the first time, 
in the Eternal City on Palm Sunday, the 29th of March 
1523, when he stayed for fourteen days and received the 
blessing of Pope Adrian VI. From Rome he proceeded, 
begging his way, to Venice, and there took ship to the 
Holy Land. 

In Jerusalem heavenly consolations filled his soul ; he 
would, there and then, have given himself up to missionary 
work among the Mohammedans, but the Franciscan 
Provincial, appealing to the Papal decrees, ordered him, 
under ecclesiastical censure, to return to his native country. 
The pilgrim bowed to the will of God and returned to 
Barcelona, as he had come, a beggar.^ 

What was he now to do ? He thought of entering a 
religious house, but his decided preference was for a life 

1 M. RiTTER, Ignatius von Loyola, Histor. Zeitschr., XXXIV., 317. 

2 Cf. JANSSEN- Pastor, IV., i6th ed , 405. 

3 Autobiography, n. 29, 40, 45-47 (pp. 54, 60-65) ; Ribadeneira, 
Vita, 1. I, c. 10. For fresh details about the journey, see Creixeli. 
(p. 35 seqq\ quoted infra, p. 20, n. 2. 


dedicated, in freedom, to God's glory. But one thing before 
all else was clear to him — the need of a well-grounded 
education.^ Thus at the age of thirty he took his place for 
two years on the benches of a boys' school at Barcelona and 
learned Latin amongst the children. Two pious women, 
Isabel Roser and Ifies Pascual, supplied him with food.^ 
For higher studies he went to the universities of Alcala and 
Salamanca. In all the three towns he gave the spiritual 
exercises and devoted himself to other works of fraternal 
charity. The followers who attached themselves to him 
wore all alike coarse brownish clothing and were thus 
nicknamed by the people the " Ensayalados."^ 

Many pious souls, especially women, came to Ignatius 
for spiritual instruction and comfort. His studies suffered 
in consequence, and he became inevitably the subject of 
remark. Ignatius incurred the suspicion of being an 
emissary of the fanatical " Alumbrados," who, under the 
pretext of being the recipients of signal gifts from God, were 
spreading distinctive errors throughout Spain, and he was 
put in prison. In Alcala his detention lasted forty-two 
days, in Salamanca twenty-two ; he refused to employ legal 
aid, and in both towns he was adjudged innocent by the 
ecclesiastical authorities. Ignatius afterwards was able to 
assure King John III. of Portugal that he had never had 
intercourse with the Alumbrados or known any of them.* 

1 Autobiography, n. 54 (p. 68) ; POLANCUS, Vita, c. 5 (p. 3 1 ). 

' For Ignatius's residence and charitable work in Barcelona before 
and after the pilgrimage to Jeusalem, see J. Creixell, S. Ignacio in 
Barcelona, 38 seq., 91 seq. According to Creixell (p. 46, n. 3) the 
name ought to be written " Roses " ; she herself signed " Roser" (Mon. 
Ignat, Ser. IV., 1., 338, 341 seq.). 

' Autobiography, n. 56-61 (pp. 69-73) ; PoLANCUS, loc. cit. ; records 
of the trial at Alcala (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 608). 

* Autobiography, n. 57-62, 69, 70 (pp. 70-74, 78, 79) ; POLANCUS, c. 5 
(p. 34 seq.)\ Ignatius to John III., dat. Rome, March 15, 1545 (jM<-v,). 


He was now, however, drawn towards that institution, 
which still maintained the reputation, centuries old, of 
being the centre of European learning — the Sorbonne in 
Paris. Ignatius reached the French capital on the 2nd of 
February 1528. Seven years were now spent in methodi- 
cal study ; after three and a half years of philosophical 
training he took his master's degree ; ^ then succeeded 
the course of theology. In order to collect alms for his 
support he appeared repeatedly during the vacations in 
Bruges and Antwerp, and once visited London.^ 

In Paris also Ignatius came under the suspicion of 
heresy; but the inquisitors, Matthaeus Ori and Thomas 
Laurentius, both of the Dominican Order, established his 
innocence. Laurentius drew up for him and his associates 
a highly honourable testimonial ; he was so much pleased 
with the Book of Exercises that he asked to be furnished 
with a copy.2 

The followers Ignatius had gathered round him in 
Spain had left him again ; in their place he found at the 
Sorbonne a company of friends from whom he was never 
to be separated. The first was Pierre le Fevre, commonly 
called Peter Faber, a Savoyard of the simplest piety and 
keenest intelligence, who was among those who shared 
board and lodging with him at the College of St. Barbe.* 

Ignat., Ser. I., I., 297); records of trial at Alcalk (Ser. IV., I., 598- 
603). Cf. F. FiTA in Boletin de la r. Acad, de la Hist, XXXIII. (1898), 
429, 457 seq. 

1 POLANCUS, C. 6 (p. 41); RiBADENEIRA, 1. 2, C. I. 

2 Autobiography, n. Ti^ 76 (pp. 80-82); Polancus, c. 6 (p. 41); 

3 Autobiography, n. 81, 86 (pp. 85, 88). The evidence in Acta 
Sanctorum, Julii, VII., n. 185. 

* Autobiography, n. 82 (p. 85) ; Memoriale B. P. Fabri, nunc primum 
in lucemleditum a P. Marcello Bouix, S.J., Lutet. Paris, 1873 (large 
edition), 7, 8. 


In tlie same company was a young nobleman of Navarre, 
endowed with brilliant gifts and filled with far-reaching 
plans: his name was Francis Xavier. Ignatius won the 
affection of the young professor and withdrew him from 
associates who at heart had become estranged from the 
teaching of the Church. Francis finally went through the 
Exercises and placed himself unreservedly in the hands of 
his friend.* Through the Exercises the Spaniards Diego 
Laynez and Alfonso Salmeron came to the same deter- 
mination; they were followed by Simon Rodriguez, a 
Portuguese; by Nicolas Bobadilla, a Spaniard; by the 
Savoyard, Claude Le Jay ; and the Frenchmen, Pascal 
Broet and Jean Codure. They almost all had taken the 
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.^ 

On the Feast of the Assumption, the 15th of August 1534, 
an important step was taken which has often been described 
as the laying of the foundation stone of the Society of 
Jesus. Ignatius and six of his first associates — Le Jay, 
Broet, and Codure had not yet joined the band — passed 
beyond the city to Montmartre, on the declivity of which 
lay the sequestered chapel of St. Denis belonging to the 
Benedictine nuns.^ Peter Faber, the only priest among 
them, celebrated Mass, and during the Holy Sacrifice each 
one vowed on the Blessed Sacrament to observe the rules 
of poverty and strict chastity and to make the pilgrimage 
to Jerusalem, there to work for the salvation of souls ; yet 
they determined, as long as their studies lasted, to retain 
possession of their means. For the sake of their pilgrim's 

* Autobiography, n. 82 (p. 85) ; Polancus, c 7 (p. 48) ; Monumenta 
Xaveriana, I., Matriti, 1 899-1 900, 204. 

2 Polancus, Vita, c. 7 (p. 49 seq.). 

3 Sec H. JOLY, St. Ignace de Loyola, Paris, 1899, 116, n. ; Ch. 
Clair, SJ., La Vie de St. Ignace de Loyola, Paris, 1891, 162-175. 
Cf. VoL X. of this work, p. 476 seq. 


journey they resolved to go to Venice and await during the 
course of a year an opportunity of securing a passage ; if 
none offered, they vowed to throw themselves at the Pope's 
feet and place their services at his disposal.^ The next two 
years saw the same solemnity repeated and, at least in the 
year 1536, three new members were among the participants.^ 

In the meantime Ignatius had been obliged, on account 
of impaired health, to revisit his home; from there he 
went to Venice. Among those whom he introduced to 
the Spiritual Exercises were Pietro Contarini and Gasparo 
de Doctis, the auditor of the Papal nuncio Girolamo 
Verallo. Even here Ignatius was not beyond reach of 
calumny, and things went so far that judicial proceedings 
were opened against him ; the sentence, however, was in 
his favour, and de Doctis lavished praise on his teaching 
and his character.^ 

Ignatius was the first of the ten comrades to enter 
Venice. Francis Xavier and the remaining eight wandered 
on foot from Paris in the winter of 1536, leathern knapsacks 
on their backs containing the Bible, the Breviary, and their 
college note-books, the rosary round their necks, towards 
the city of the lagoons.* There they stayed two months 

* Autobiography, n. 85 (pp. 87, 88); Memoriale P. Fabri, 12; P. 
Simonis Rodericii Commentarium de origine et progressu Societatis 
Jesu (account of the origin and progress of the Society of Jesus, com- 
piled at Lisbon in 1577 by Simon Rodriguez at the command of the 
General, Everard Mercurian) in the Epistulae PP. Paschasii Broeti, 
Claudii Jaii, Joannis Codurii et Simonis Rodericii, Matriti, 1903, 


* Memoriale P. Fabri, 13 ; Rodericius, Commentarium, 459. 

' Autobiography, n. 92, 93 (p. 92). The text in Acta Sanctorum, 
Julii, VII., n. 255-258. P. Contarini was not the Cardinal's nephew 
{cf. Tacchi Venturi, I., 444, n.). 

* Rodericius, 462-474; letter of Laynez, 11 3- 114; Memoriale 
Fabri, 13. 


and a half; they worked in the hospitals, ministering to 
the souls and bodies of the sick; then they started for 
Rome to obtain the blessing of the Pope on their coming 

Only Ignatius was left behind. He feared two men in 
Rome : Cardinal Carafa, with whom he had had shortly 
before serious differences of opinion in Venice, and Pedro 
Ortiz, the Imperial plenipotentiary at the court of Rome, 
to whom, as a teacher in the University of Paris, he formerly 
had been obnoxious.^ But it was no other than Ortiz who 
gave his friends a warm recommendation to the Pope. 
Paul III. ordered the Parisian theologians to carry on a 
debate with several Roman doctors while he was eating 
his dinner. When he had finished his meal he called the 
former to him and, with outstretched arms, said he was 
delighted to see so great learning combined with so great 
modesty. He gave them willingly his permission to go to 
Jerusalem, sent unsolicited on two occasions money for the 
journey, but remarked that he did not believe that they 
would ever reach that city.^ Cardinal Carafa also showed 
great signs of favour.* 

The pilgrims now returned to Venice. There, in virtue 
of special permission from the Pope, Ignatius, Francis 
Xavier, and five others were ordained priests.^ 

A ship had now to be waited for. The ten dispersed 
themselves over various towns of the Republic during the 
time of suspense, and Verallo gave them authority to preach 

* Letter of Laynez, 115, 116. 

2 PoLANCUS, c 8 (p. 56); Ignatius to Carafa, Venice, 1536 (Men. 
Ignat, Ser. I., I., 114-118); Autobiography, n. 93 (p. 93). The 
opposition between Carafa and Ignatius has not yet been fully cleared 

up (see Stimmen aus Maria Laach, XLIX., 533). 

3 RODERICIUS, 486, 487. 

* Autobiography, n. 96 (p. 94). 

5 RODERICIUS, 487, 488 ; letter of Laynez, 117. 


and hear confessions.^ But the experience of previous 
years was now repeated ; owing to the war between Venice 
and the Turks the whole year went by without a single 
ship setting sail for Palestine;^ they were thus free from 
their vow of pilgrimage and had to see in Rome the 
Jerusalem of their quest. First of all they resolved, how- 
ever, to visit the Italian universities, " in order to see," as 
Laynez expressed it, " whether God was calling the one or 
the other student to their manner of life."^ But here a 
doubt arose. In Paris the companions of Ignatius had 
come to be called " Inigista."* They now asked them- 
selves : "When questioned as to what congregation we 
belong to, what answer can we give?" They agreed to 
say that they belonged to the Society of Jesus.^ The 
love of Jesus had united them ; Jesus was their leader, and 
His glory the only thing they strove for.* True servants 
of Christ two of them were also recognized to be by 
Vittoria Colonna in Ferrara, the city which had fallen to 
their lot. This great woman supported them — they were 
Le Jay and Rodriguez, — consulted them in cases of 
conscience, and called them to the attention of Duke 

* Documents in Acta Sanctorum, loc. cit., n. 252-254. 
^ Letter of Laynez, 116. 

3 Ibid., 118; cf. RODERICIUS, 491 ; POLANCUS, c. 8 (p. 62). 

* Epistolae P. H. Nadal, L, 2. 

' The name " Jesuit " is older than the foundation of the Society. In 
the course of the 15th century it was used sometimes of a pious 
Christian, sometimes of a Mendicant brother. It seems to have been 
given to members of the Society first in the Netherlands in 1 544, and 
certainly as a term of odium. The name was for a long time unpleasing 
to the Society, but they gradually got reconciled to it and finally made 
use of it themselves (N. Paulus in the Zeitschr. fiir kathol. Theol., 
XXVII., 174, 17s ; cf. also zbid., 378-380, and Braunsbsrger, B. P. 
Canisii Epistulae, I., 121, 134, 135). 

8 PoLANCus, Vita, c. 9 (pp. 72-74); Bartoli, I., 2, n. 36. 


Ercole II., who heard them preach and had recourse to 
Le Jay as confessor.* 

Ignatius himself, with Faber and Laynez, went on foot 
to Rome, to prepare the way for the others. At their 
last halting-place, La Storta, where Ignatius was at prayer 
in the little church, he had a deep spiritual experience. 
He believed that he had a vision of Christ, and heard Him 
say, " I will be gracious to you." Ignatius told his com- 
panions, and observed, " I know not what awaits us at 
Rome ; perhaps crucifixion; but one thing I know certainly, 
Christ will be gracious to us."^ This vision also heartened 
him strongly to inscribe the name of Jesus on his banner 
and on that of his companions.^ 

Their reception by the Curia was on the whole a chilling 
one. Ignatius said that he felt that the windows were 
shut;* yet the Pope accepted willingly the services of 
the new association. Faber and Laynez were to lecture 
on theology at the Sapienza, while Ignatius endeavoured 
to propagate his Spiritual Exercises. The Imperial 
ambassador, Pedro Ortiz, went with him for forty days to 
Monte Cassino ; when he had gone through the Exercises 
he appeared to himself to be a different man : he had, in 
his own words, in those forty days learned a philosophy 
of which he had never dreamed in the long years of his 
activity as a teacher in Paris.^ Cardinal Contarini also 

» RODERICIUS, 496 ; letter of Laynez, 118; POLANCUS, c. 8 (p. 63) ; 
Bartoli, I., 2, c. 38 ; TaCCHI Venturi, v. Colonna, 152 seqq. 

2 PoLANCUS, c. 8 (p. 63 seq) ; Ribadeneira, De actis S. Ignatii, 
n. 83. Cf. Tacchi Venturi, I., 413 ^^qq- 

» PoLANCUS, c. 8 (p. 64) ; Ribadeneira, loc. cit. ; J. P. Maffeius, 
S.J., De Vita et moribus Ignatii Loiolae {supra, p. 3, note), 1. 2, c. 5 (in 
the edition Ignatii Loiolae vita, postremo recognita, Antverpiae, 1605, 

72); ORLANDINUS,1.2,n.29-3I,62. C^i also TaCCHI VENTURI, I., 587. 
* Autobiography, n. 97 (p. 95). 
« Ibid.^ n. 98 (p. 95) ; POLANCUS, c. 8 (p. 64) ; BARTOLI, I., I, n. 18. 


underwent the same under the guidance of Ignatius, and 
was so enchanted that he copied the Book of Exercises 
with his own hand ; he thanked God that He had at last 
sent the man on earth for whom he had been longing. 
Ortiz and Contarini became great friends and patrons of 
the new Society.^ 

Ignatius and his followers first found shelter in a villa 
on the slope of the Pincian Hill near Trinita dei Monti ; 
Quirino Garzoni, a Roman nobleman, had handed it 
over to them for the sake of Christ. They begged alms 
for their support, but the house was too remote ; they 
therefore moved at Easter 1538 into the inner city to a 
spot which was no better situated, and afterwards in the 
same year hired from Antonino Frangipani a roomy 
building in the neighbourhood of the Capitol near Torre 
del Melangelo which is standing to this day.'^ 

In May 1538 the ten members of the Society were all 
assembled in Rome. They found, wrote Ignatius to 
Spain,' a soil bearing few good fruits and many evil. 
The Cardinal-Legate, Vincenzo Carafa, gave them full 
powers to preach and dispense the Sacraments.* They 
began to preach and give instruction in Christian doctrine 
in different churches and in public places. The Romans 
opened wide their eyes when they saw men mount the 
pulpit who did not wear monastic dress ; this was so 
unprecedented that many said, " We thought that no one 

* Cartas del B. P. Fabro, 6 ; Polancus, loc. cit. ; Maffeius, L 2, 
C 6, 12 ; OrlandinuS, 1. 2, n. 34 ; Bartoli, L i, n. 18. 

* Now the Palazzo Delfini in the Via Delfini, No. 16; Rodericius, 
499 ; Polancus, c. 8 ; Tacchi Venturi, Le case abitate in Roma da 
S. Ignazio di Loiola, Roma, 1899, 9, 13-18. 

» To Isabel Roser, dat. Rome, 1538, Dec. 19 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I,, 
I., 138). 

* Memoriale Fabri, 14,15. Text of the document in Acta Sanctorum, 
Julii, VII., n. 295-298. 


bat cr^onAS L<i.d a right to preach." ^ Another innovation 
also was preaching after Easter ; it was not customary in 
Rome to have sermons except during Advent and Lent.^ 
Ignatius preached in Spanish in S. Maria di Monserrato.^ 
Many now began to go to confession and to communicate 
frequently. This practice, Rodriguez relates, had almost 
become obsolete in many places in Italy ; if a man went 
every eight days to the Lord's table, he became the town's 
talk ; he was spoken of in letters to friends at a distance 
as a strange novelty.* 

The " reformed priests," as Ignatius and those with 
him were called, continued to gain the confidence of the 
people. They were soon able to say, "If our number 
were quadrupled we should not be able to satisfy all 
wishes."* Those were auspicious beginnings; but the 
storm was soon to break which threatened to snap the 
tender plant. 

Paul III. in March 1538 went to Nice to restore peace 
between Charles V. and Francis I.;^ the Augustinian, 
Agostino Piemontese, now thought that the moment had 
come to disseminate in Rome the Lutheran doctrine which 

1 RoDERicius, 499. 

'^ Ignatius to Isabel Roser, dat. Rome, 1538, Dec. 19 (Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. I., I., 139). 

3 POLANCUS, C. 8 (p. 64). 

* RODERICIUS, 477. Ignatius, on the contrary, in the Exercises 
notes the practice of weekly communion as a sign of genuine Catholic 
feeling (Regulae ad sentiendum vere cum ecclesia, n. 2). He goes 
further and recommends daily communion as circumstances require 
(see his letter to the Sister, Teresa Rejadella, of Nov. 15, 1543, in Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 275 se^.). Cf. also Tacchi Venturi, I., 230 seqq. 

^ Roman memorial of the first companions, 1539, first published in 
the Constitutiones Societatis Jesu latinae et hispanieae cum earuro 
declarationibus, Matriti, 1892, 298. 

^ See Vol. XI. of this work, pp. 279 seqq. 


he cherished at heart. He preached it from the pulpit, yet 
with caution, but Loyola and his helpmates saw through 
the man, and after ineffectual exhortations addressed to 
him in private, they began to refute him publicly. This 
infuriated the friar, and also certain Spaniards among 
the circle of his admirers. They scattered the gravest 
suspicions abroad against the new preachers. As their 
reports obtained wide credence, Ignatius demanded an 
investigation ; it was an easy matter for him to convict 
the principal organ of these calumnies, a Navarrese, of 
falsehood, and obtain his expulsion from Rome. The 
others now made a declaration that they held the Fathers 
to be free from blame; but with that they wished pro- 
ceedings to come to an end and the matter to be buried 
in oblivion ; they won over the Cardinal-Legate* and the 
Governor of the city to acquiesce in this escape from the 

But Ignatius and his comrades would have been 
debarred from any successful work unless every taint 
of suspicion were removed from the integrity of their 
conduct and doctrine. Ignatius, therefore, was immovable 
in his determination that the case should go on ; he went 
to Paul III. at Frascati and in a long interview obtained 
the Pope's permission that the trial should go on to the 
end and the decision be given in accordance with strict 
judicial formality. This, however, was not obtained without 
difficulty ; the opposing party had powerful connections 
and were not inexperienced in the art of intrigue. But 
circumstances intervened favourable to Ignatius, for at 
that very moment there were in Rome three of the judges 
before whom he had previously appeared : the episcopal 

* Not to the Imperial ambassador, as translated by H. BoHMER 
(Die Bekenntnisse des Ignatius von Loyola, Stifters der Gesellscbaft 
Jesu, Leipzig, 1902, 64). 


Vicar of Alcala, the Parisian Inquisitor Ori, and the 
auditor of the nuncio at Venice; these were unanimous 
in insisting on his innocence and that of his friends. From 
Vicenza, Bologna, Siena, where they had worked, came 
glowing testimonials, as also from Cardinal Contarini and 
the Duke of Ferrara. At last, after the troublesome suit 
had dragged on for eight months, Benedetto Conversini, 
as senior judge in temporal and ecclesiastical cases at 
Rome, gave his decision : he pronounced complete acquittal 
on all the ten ; all the charges brought against them 
were groundless.^ 

Ignatius was now able to say his first Mass in peace of 
mind. It took place on Christmas Day 1538 at S. Maria 
Maggiore.2 This coincided with a fresh opportunity of 
showing acts of charity to the Roman poor. The winters 
of 1538 and 1539 were marked by the severity of the cold 
and the scarcity of food,^ and people lay on the open street 
stark and half dead. Towards evening the fathers went 
their rounds, gathered the unfortunates in groups, and took 
them to the roomy chambers of the Frangipani dwelling- 
house; there they distributed bread which they had 
begged, spread out beds of straw, and gave instructions 
in the faith and prayed ; sometimes from 200 to 400 
persons were thus tended. Their example kindled others ; 
Cardinals and other great personages collected money ; in 

^ Ignatius to Pietro Contarini and to Isabel Roser, dat. Rome, 1538, 
Dec 2 and 19 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 134-136, 138-143): Auto- 
biography, n. 98 (p. 96) ; letter of Laynez, 148 ; Polancus, c. 9 
^pp. 67-69) ; RODERiciUS, 502-507 ; Epistolae P. Pasch. Broeti, 385, 
n. I. The original judgment is given in Mon. Ignat, Ser. IV., I., 

2 Ignatius to his brother in Loyola, dat. Rome, Feb. 2, 1539 (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 147). 

8 Cf. BONTEMPI, 376 ; Manente, 263, and the **memoranda of 
Cornelius de Fine (Cod. Ottob., 1614, Vatican Library). 


the hospitals of the city upwards of 3000 poor and sick 
were ministered to.* 

"After we had been declared innocent," Peter Faber 
relates in his Memoriale,^ "we placed ourselves un- 
reservedly at the disposal of Paul 1 1 1." The Pope accepted 
the offer gladly, and showed willingness to send some of 
the community into different spheres of work. The latter, 
however, had come already to important determinations. 
Ignatius himself at a later date^ directed the secretary of 
the Order, Polanco, to give explanations on this point to the 
rector of the college at Bologna, who was at work on an 
account of the origin of the Society. Polanco wrote : " The 
first of those whom our father Ignatius drew round him in 
Paris, as well as he himself, betook themselves to Italy, not 
with the intention of founding an Order but with the 
purpose of going to Jerusalem to preach among the infidel 
and there to die. But they were unable to get to Jerusalem 
and had to remain in Italy ; and as the Pope afterwards 
availed himself of them for the service of God and of the 
Holy See, then the idea of forming themselves into a 
corporate society came under consideration."* Polanco 
wrote more explicitly in his Life of the founder : " When 
they had come together again in Rome in 1538 they were 
still without any intention of forming any perpetual 
association or order."* But in 1539, so Laynez relates 

> Letter of Laynez, 146; Polancus, c. 8 (pp. 65,66); Rodericius, 

499, 500- 

2 Memoriale, 15. 

3 On July 29, 1553. 

* This important letter was first published in Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., V., 
259, 260. 

* POLANCUS: c. 9 (pp. 69, 70) ; cf. letter of Laynez, 1 14 ; J. Creixell, 
S.J., Explicacidn critica de una cuestidn hagiogrdfica ; Razon y 
Fe, XX., Madrid, 1908, 215-222; on the contrary side, Fr. VAN 


later on, "we gave ourselves to prayer and afterwards came 
together and weighed the circumstances of our vocation 
point by point. Each one set forth as it seemed to him 
the pro and contra of the matter. In the first place, we 
were of one accord that we should found a society having 
a permanent existence and not one limited to the term of 
our natural lives." ^ 

At first there were great differences of opinion on the 
question of obedience. Towards Ignatius all indeed had 
shown persistently the utmost reverence and submission ; 
but the office of Superior, to whom voluntary subjection 
was offered, had changed in the different groups from week 
to week and afterwards, when they were altogether at 
Rome, from month to month.^ Were they now, in addition 
to the vows of poverty and chastity which they had taken 
already in Venice at the hands of Verallo, to pledge them- 
selves to yet another, that of obedience to one of their 
own body and so constitute themselves an order? From 
contemporary memoranda it is evident that nearly three 
months of prayer and penitential exercises preceded their 
decision. Finally, they all agreed to take the vow.^ 

To Ignatius was assigned the task of drawing up the 
draft constitution of the Order. Cardinal Contarini, who 

OrtrOY, S.J., Manrese et les origines de la Compagnie de Jesus ; 
Analecta Boll., XXVII. (1908), 393-418. 

1 Letter of Laynez, 146, 147. 

2 RODERICIUS, 489, 490. 

» The notes were first published by P. J. J. DE LA TORRE, S.J. 
(Constitutiones Soc. Jesu lat. et hisp., 297-301) ; cf. also RodericiUS, 
508, 509. The resolution of April 15, 1539, to take the vow of 
obedience, with the autograph signatures of Ignatius and his com- 
panions, is in the Museum of the Society for the Propagation of the 
Faith at Lyons ; facsimile in P. M. Baumgarten, Die kath. Kirche, 
III., Munich, 1902, 33, and in Les Missions Cath., XIV. (1882), 571 ; 
r-^. ihid.^ 576. 


looked upon the members of this company^ as his 
"special spiritual sons in Christ," undertook to recommend 
their rules for confirmation to the Pope, But the latter 
referred the document to the Master of the Sacred Palace, 
Tommaso Badia, a Dominican, who after two months' 
examination pronounced the scheme to be " pious and 
holy." 2 On September the 3rd, 1539, Contarini was able 
to write the news to Ignatius from Tivoli, where Paul III. 
was sojourning, that he had received the draft with Badia's 
opinion. "To-day I read aloud to the Pope all the five 
heads. He was much pleased with them, and confirmed 
them with expressions of strong approval."^ From other 
witnesses we learn that the Pope, after receiving Contarini's 
report, exclaimed : " There is the finger of God ! " He 
then lifted up his hand in blessing and said, " We give 
this our benediction ; we approve it and call it good." * 
Cardinal Ghinucci, Paul III. enjoined, was to draw up a 
brief appropriate to the occasion, or, at his own discretion, 
a Bull.5 

But before such a document appeared there was much 
ground to be covered. Paul I II., in the first instance, ordered 
three Cardinals to examine the draft. One of them, the 
influential Bartolommeo Guidiccioni, was opposed, on 
principle, to new orders ; it would be much better, he 
said, if the existing orders were cut down to the number of 
four ; he would not even look at the scheme of Ignatius. 

* Ignatius to Cardinal Contarini, dat. Rome, 1540, March-April 
(Mon. Ignat., Sen I., I., 156). 

^ Evidence of Cardinal Contarini in DlTTRiCH, Regesten, 305, and 
Bartoli, I., 2, n. 45. 

' Cartas de San Ignacio, I., Madrid, 1874, 433, 434 {cf. above, 
p. I seq., n. i). The minutes, which were approved by the Pope 
orally on Sept. 3, 1539, are in TaCCHI Venturi, I., 412. 

* RODERicius, 508, 509; Orlandinus, 1. 2, n. 83. 

* Cartas, loc. cit. ; Dittrich, loc. cit, 

VOL. XII. 3 


But Loyola did not give in ; he obtained many prayers, 
and vowed that he would have three thousand Masses said. 
Meanwhile good news came from without; Cardinal 
Ennio Filonardi was full of praise of Faber and Laynez, 
whom he had besought the Pope to send to his Legation, 
and Cardinal Francesco Bandini, Archbishop of Siena, gave 
very favourable accounts of Broet.^ Suddenly Cardinal 
Guidiccioni asked to see the plan of the Society ; he was 
delighted with it; here, he declared, an exception ought 
to be made, and used his influence strongly for its con- 
firmation.2 The preparation of the Bull was carried out 

This important document was issued by Paul III. at 
Rome on the 27th of September 1540.* It begins with 
the mention of the first ten members. These men, "im- 
pelled, as we may well believe, by the Holy Spirit,"^ had 
left the world, formed themselves into a community, and 
for many years worked in the Lord's vineyard. Then 
follow the ground lines of the constitution of the Order, 
commonly called the "formula of the institution." The 
word societas is used in the military sense of a troop or 
squadron, which is "emblazoned with the name of Jesus, 

* Letter of Laynez, 147 ; Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 203 ; Bartoli, 1. 2, 
n. 46. 

' Letter of Laynez, 122, 123, 147, 148; RODERiCius, 514, 515; 

POLANCUS, C. 9 (p. 72); MAFFEIUS, 1. 2, C. 12; ORLANDINUS, 1. 2, 

n. 113, 114. 

3 For Cardinal Ghinucci's fears, see L. Tolomei's letter of Sept. 28, 
1 539, in DiTTRiCH, loc. cit.^ 379. Cf. also Tacchi Venturi, I., 579 seq. 

* Litterae Apostolicae, quibus Institutio, Confirmatio et varia 
Privilegia continentur Societatis Jesu, Antverpiae, 1635, 7-16; Bull 

VI., 303-306. 

' "Spiritu sancto, ut pie creditur, afflati." In the second Bull of 
confirmation of Julius III., of July 21, 1550, the expression is simply; 
•' Spiritu Sancto afflati" (Litt. Apost, 8, 58), 


and consists of men who fight for God under the banner 
of the Cross and serve none other than Christ the Lord 
and His representative on earth, the Pope of Rome," The 
special aim of the Order is defined to be the furtherance of 
Christian thought and practice and the propagation of the 
faith by means of preaching, spiritual exercises. Christian 
doctrine, confession, and other works of charity. To the 
three ordinary vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience 
another was joined whereby the Society was pledged in a 
special way to the Pope's service ; in virtue of this, it was 
said, " We must, where the salvation of souls and the spread 
of the faith are concerned, we must do all within our power 
to execute on the spot every command of the present Pope 
and his successors without any hesitation or evasion, 
whether we be sent to the Turks or to any other infidel 
peoples, even in the regions named the ' Indies,' or among 
heretics or schismatics or even, if needs be, among the 
faithful." As especially necessary and profitable the 
explanation of the fundamental grounds of the Christian 
faith was then insisted on. The Superior, to be chosen by 
the members, shall appoint to and distribute the offices. 
Capital or settled incomes shall not be held by individuals 
or by the Society, except in the case of the colleges serving 
as seminaries for the younger members, whose spiritual 
discipline and educational training are entirely in the hands 
of the Society. The daily office is to be said by the 
members individually and not in common. 

The Pope confirmed these constitutions, took the members 
under his own special protection and that of the Apostolic 
See, and gave permission for the formation of more de- 
tailed regulations. The number, however, of members of 
the Order was not to exceed sixty. Ignatius was highly 
gratified at thus provisionally securing so much, and ex- 
pressed himself in terms of warm gratitude to Cardinal 


Contarini ; * nor was Cardinal Guidiccioni passed over 
without marks of recognition from the whole Society.^ 

In the April of 1541 Ignatius was chosen General of the 
Order 2 by the unanimous voice of the other nine, present 
and absent, only one of the latter abstaining from sending 
his vote. " I chose him," wrote Jean Codure, " because I 
have always recognized in him a fervent zeal for God's glory 
and the salvation of souls. He also has always been 
amongst us as the least of all and the servant of all."* 

On the 22nd of April 1541 the six members resident in 
Rome made a pilgrimage to the seven principal churches 
and in a chapel of the Basilica of S. Paolo fuori le mura 
took these solemn vows while Ignatius celebrated Mass.^ 

The newly professed conducted themselves so well that 
the Pope, not quite three years later (March 14th, 1544), 
cancelled entirely the restriction of the Society to sixty 
members ; at the same time he enjoined that the rules 
drawn up for itself by the Society should at once receive 
confirmation.^ In a brief of June 1545 he further gave 
the Society, " in view of the great advantages it had con- 
ferred and continued to confer on the House of God," full 

* Ignatius to P. Contarini, Rome, 1540, Dec. 18 (Men. Ignat., 
Ser. I., I., 168). 

2 Francis Xavier wrote on March 18, 1541 : "We have said 250 
Masses for Cardinal Guidiccioni" (Mon. Xaver., I., 245, 295). Simon 
Rodriguez also writes from Lisbon on Oct. 8, 1540, of 55 Masses which 
he had recently said for the same Cardinal (Selectae Indiarum 
Epistolae nunc primum editae, Florentiae, 1887, 4) ; c/. also Bartoli, 
1. 2, n. 46. 

3 The account of the election by Ignatius himself is in the Constitu- 
tiones Soc. Jesu lat. et hisp., 313, 314. 

* Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 419. 

* POLANCUS, Chronicon, n. 26. 

'> This and following Papal letters are in the Litlera? Apostolicae, 


powers to preach everywhere, to give absolution for all 
sins, even in cases reserved for the Holy See, the exceptions 
of the Bull " Ccena Domini" alone being retained, to ad- 
minister the Eucharist and other Sacraments without 
obtaining previous permission from the bishop or parish 
priest, yet without prejudice to any third person. 

In the meantime it had become evident that there were 
very many excellent priests who had been of great help as 
coadjutors to the Order but yet were inadequately furnished 
with the educational and theological requirements de- 
manded in the professed members of the Society. In 1546 
Paul III. therefore ordered their admission ; after a period 
of probation they were to be allowed to take the vows, but 
in their simple, not their solemn, form. Likewise, according 
to the usage existing in other orders, lay brothers were to 
be received for domestic service. 

In the following year the Pope bestowed a plenary in- 
dulgence, obtainable once in a lifetime, on anyone offering 
up prayers in honour of our Lord's Passion after making 
confession to a Jesuit priest.^ Paul III. conferred besides 
extensive indulgences ^ transferable to others on the 
founder, and encouraged the formation of new settlements 
by special graces.' 

' Oliverius Manareus, S.J. (+1614), De rebus Societatis Jesu Com- 
mentarius, Florentiae, 1886, 120, 121. In the *Mandati, 1542-1546, 
f. 65, is included : *" Sacerdotibus Societatis Jesu Christ! de Urbe rubrum 
unum cum dimidio salis nigri gratis et amore Dei, dat. 1543, Sept. 12" 
(State Archives, Rome). 

2 Braunsberger, IV., 30 ; cf. also Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 172, 526 
seqq. ; perhaps the letter here printed, of June 11, 1547, led Ranke 
(Papste, I., loth ed., 123) to make the strange statement that " Loyola, 
and later on his adherents, had, like the Spanish ' Alumbrados,' mads 
a general confession a condition of absolution." 

^ Synopsis Actorum S. Sedis in causa Societatis Jesu, I., Florentiae, 
1887, 4-8 ; Braunsberger, I., 362, n. t, 696. 


The Pope crowned these enactments by the Bull issued, 
at the instance of Francis Borgia, four weeks before his 
death. For years Ignatius had wished the Society to 
possess such a " Mare Magnum " as that granted by 
Sixtus IV. to the Franciscans — a Bull, namely, which 
should amalgamate once for all the various decrees, 
privileges, and graces for which otherwise special applica- 
tion for reconfirmation would always be necessary in each 
particular case.^ 

The Bull appeared on the i8th of October 1549. It con- 
ferred exemption on the Society from taxation and from all 
episcopal jurisdiction ; without the General's consent no 
member of the Order can accept a bishropric or any other 
ecclesiastical dignity ; the Order cannot be called upon 
to undertake the spiritual direction of women ; the faithful 
are permitted to confess to and receive communion from 
the priests of the Order without asking permission of their 
parish priest — save at Easter and on the administration of 
the Viaticum. Then follow many other grants and plenary 
faculties in favour of the Order; the earlier guarantees 
are confirmed and in respect of missionary countries largely 

After the year 1539 and the first authorization of the 
Society of Jesus its external circumstances began to im- 
prove. The fathers who had hired the Frangipani dwelling 
were joined by Pietro Codacio, who relinquished his rich 
benefices. This first Italian Jesuit was a man of noble 
family, much beloved by ecclesiastics of the higher ranks ; * 

* Ignatius to Oviedo, dat. Rome, 1547, Nov. 24 (Mon. Ignat,, Ser. I., 
I,, 653, 654 ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, n. 273). Cf. S. Franciscus Borgia, 
III., Matriti, 1909, 28. 

2 Litterae Apostolicae, 35-56 ; Bull. Rom., VI., 394-401. 

* POLANCus, loc. cit., n. 11; Maffeius, I. 2, c. 14; Tacchi 
Venturi, Le case, 6, 28, n. 2. 


he undertook to provide a dwelling, sustenance, and 
clothing for his colleagues. 

The first great requisite was a church. Ignatius had 
his eye on the parish church of S. Maria degli Astalli — 
popularly known as S. Maria della Strada— not far from 
the foot of the Capitol and near S. Marco, the Papal 
summer residence. The building was narrow and incon- 
venient but in a very good situation for mission work.^ 
Codacio went to the Pope and asked him to bestow the 
church on the Order; they received it in 1540; in 1541 
the Bull was drawn up, and in 1542 Ignatius took posses- 
sion of the church and its appurtenances. Codacio took 
over the administration of the parish.^ Besides this he 
acquired in 1543 the neighbouring and almost abandoned 
parish church of S. Andrea de la Fracta, with permission 
to let the church and parish lapse. Six years later the 
Pope added two other parish churches to the above and in 
exchange erected four chapels in S. Marco and transferred 
thither the parochial cures of these four churches.^ In 
order to be better able to supervise his church, Ignatius 
settled in 1541 in a hired lodging of small compass near 
at hand. Codacio begged from Cardinals and bishops, 
enlarged the church, and built alongside of it the General's 
house; this was occupied in 1544.* The picture of Our 
Lady over the high altar, then scarcely noticed, became 
afterwards an object of great veneration.^ On the site of 
S. Maria della Strada was afterwards erected, by the 

* Polanco to Araoz, dat. Rome, 1547, Oct. 31 (Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., I., 
616, 617) ; Orlandinus, I., 3, n. 15. 

2 Tacchi Venturi, Le case, 28, 29, 39 ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, 
n. 49 ; Tacchi Venturi, I., 415 seq. 

3 Synopsis Actorum S. Sedis, I., 9, 10. 

* PoLANcus, loc. cit. ; Tacchi Venturi, Le case, 19, 20, 32. 

fi Cf. Tacchi Venturi, 27, 38-40, where the current representations 
of the picture and the Church are for the first time corrected. 


munificence of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, the magni- 
ficent church of the Gesii. 

The devotion and gratitude of the new Order towards 
the Pope was displayed in the work undertaken by them 
in Papal Rome. Here there were unbelievers and sinners 
in plenty to convert. Among the numerous Jews there 
were many who recoiled from the acceptance of the 
Christian faith through an anxious fear for their temporal 
belongings. Ignatius succeeded in obtaining from the 
Pope, whose behaviour towards the Jews was marked by 
traditional leniency,^ a brief dated the 2ist of March 1542 
which stated that no Jew was to lose his property because 
of his conversion to Christianity. Even children who 
became Christians against their parents' will were to re- 
ceive their full portion of inheritance. What had accrued 
through usury or other unjust means must be restored to 
the rightful owners, where the latter were to be found 
otherwise it belonged to the convert. The same conces- 
sions were granted to all unbelievers who received baptism.^ 

* Besides Rieger-Vogelstein, II., 61 seg., cf. also Revue juive, 
IX., 81 ; Archiv fiir Kirchenrecht, LI 1 1., 36 seq. ; Univ. Cath., XIX., 
(1895), 102 seq. In order to protect the Jews in Rome from outrages, the 
celebration of the Passion play in the Colosseum was instituted in 1540 
(see AdinOLFI, II., 388; Dejob, Influence, 210 seq.-, GregorOVIUS, 
Schriften, III., 189; Vatasso, Per la storia di dramma sacro, Roma, 
1903, 86). The decree of Paul III. of May 12, 1540, which forbade the 
persecution of the Jews under the severest penalties and anathemas, has 
been published from the original text by Seeberg in Hengstenbergs 
Evangel. Kirchenzeitung, 1900, No. 50. As a remedy for the usury 
which was practised in Rome, certainly not by the Jews only, Giovanni da 
Calvi, the Franciscan, succeeded in opening a Monte di Pieta in Rome 
which was approved and privileged by Paul III. in a Bull of Sept. 9, 1539. 
Cardinal Quiiiones was appointed Protector of the Compagnia del Monte 
(see Tamilia, II. s. Monte di Pietk di Roma, Roma, 1900, 24 seq). 

2 Bull. VI., 336, 337. Rieger-VogelsteiN (II., 63) is as wrong 
in his dating of the Bull as in his comments upon it. 


In order to facilitate conversions two houses, on Loyola's 
advice, were established for catechumens, the one for men 
and the other for women ; a confraternity was also founded 
composed of distinguished and influential personages in 
Roman society, and Cardinal Marcello Crescenzi was named 
Protector.^ Paul III. issued a Bull in February 1543 
praising the work and conferring spiritual graces.^ On 
Whitsunday 1544, amid a great concourse of people, five 
Israelites were solemnly baptized, one of them being a 
Rabbi with a great reputation for learning. In 1544 Jews, 
Moors, and Turks to the number altogether of forty were 
baptized, and at the beginning of the following year ten 
others received the same sacrament.^ 

Another undertaking had still better results. This aimed 
at the removal of a permanent evil which the Renaissance 
had bequeathed to Rome. Prostitution was a sore from 
which the capital of the world suffered now as in times 
past.* It was not enough to provoke to tears by penitential 
sermons ; if there were to be no relapses some asylums of 
refuge would have to be provided. The convent of the 
Maddalena was indeed in existence for those who wished 
to take the veil ; but it was not sufficient for all those who 
sought admission, and among the latter were also married 
women who had left their husbands. Ignatius determined 
to create a home for such as these ; many showed a will- 
ingness to help, but no one wished to be the first to begin ; 

* Ignatius to Francis Xavier, dat. Rome, July 1 543, and to the Society, 
1543 or 1544 (Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., I., 249, 268, 269). 

2 Bull. VI, 353-358. 

3 Ignatius to the Society, dat. Rome, 1543 or 1544 (Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. I., I., 249, 250) ; Jeronimo Domenech, S.J., to Simon Rodriguez, 
dat. Rome, 1545, Jan. 29 (Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 773-774). 

* Cf. Vol. XI. of this work, p. 348, n. 5, and Arch. d. Soc. Rom.. 
XXXI., 413. 


he therefore set his hand to the work. Codacio had un- 
earthed a number of antiquities on his building site and 
sold them for about a hundred ducats. The General gave 
them for the erection of an institution which was to be 
called the Casa di Santa Marta. Here married women 
could stay until they were reconciled with their husbands 
or remain permanently if they wished to persevere in a 
moral life ; as also could sinful women in the single 
state until they entered wedlock or professed religion.^ 
Cardinals supported the undertaking, and the Pope sent 
help in money and recommended the work in a special 

Leonora Osorio, the wife of the Spanish ambassador 
Juan de Vega, who confessed weekly to Ignatius, took an 
energetic part in the work. Also Margaret of Austria, 
the wife of Duke Ottavio Farnese of Camerino, gave 
effectual help.' The young Jesuit, Peter Faber of Halle, 
wrote on the 29th of April 1546 from Rome to Cologne, 
*' Every day one of us goes to pray for S. Marta's house." * 
In order to secure the permanency of the institution high 
ecclesiastics, nobles, and other distinguished persons formed 
themselves into the " Compagnia della Grazia " under the 
patronage of Cardinal Carpi, at whose request the Society 

* Ignatius to F. Xavier, dat. Rome, 1543, July 24, and Jan. 30, 1544, 
(Mon. Ignat., Sen I., I., 269-271); POLANCUS, Chronicon, i, n. 68; 
RiBADENEiRA, De actis S. Ignatii, n. 46. Cf. especially Tacchi 
Venturi, I., 420 seqq. 

2 Domenech to Rodriguez, dat. Rome, 1545, Jan. 29(Epist. P. Pasch. 
Broeti, 774) ; Ignatius to F. Xavier, dat. Rome 1543, July 24, and 1544, 
Jan. 30, and to Simon Rodriguez, dat. Rome, 1545, Nov. 21 (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 269, 329, 330) ; Ribadeneira, Vita, 1. 3, c. 9. 

3 Report written by order of Ignatius in Rome, 1545 (Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. I., I., 305, 306). 

* Rheinische Akten zur Gesch. des Jesuitenordens, 1 542-1582 
Bearbeitet von JOSEPH Hansen, Bonn, 1896, 51. 


undertook for a while the religious direction of the 
institution.^ On the other hand, Ignatius gave to three 
noble ladies of Rome the three keys of S. Marta.^ He 
was told that his work was hopeless ; that these un- 
fortunates were already too hardened in vice. He replied : 
" If I only succeed in rescuing one of them from one night 
of sin, I shall not regret my trouble."^ His success far 
exceeded his hopes; in 1545 he was able to write to 
Spain : " There are now from thirty-seven to thirty-eight 
women in S. Marta ; most of them are doing spontane- 
ously penance for their past life."* Up to the end of 
1547 more than a hundred women of this class had been 
brought to a better way of life.^ 

Another institution almost contemporaneous, which also 
owed its existence to Ignatius or in which he was at least 
one of the original co-operators, was that of S. Caterina 
dei Funari. Maidens whose innocence was imperilled by 
poverty or bad upbringing were here educated until they 
married or entered a convent.^ 

The Roman orphanages found a warm friend in the 
General of the Jesuits. Margaret of Austria sent him on 
one occasion 300 ducats for distribution among the poor. 

* Ignatius to Francis Xavier and the Spanish Jesuits, dat. Rome, 
1543. July 24, and beginning of 1544; Bartolome Ferron, S.J., to 
Rodriguez, dat. Rome, 1546, April 12 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 269,270, 
286, 287, 371, 372) J RiBADENEIRA, 1. 3, C. 9 ; ORLANDINUS, 1. 4, 

n. 75 ; Bartoli, 1. 4, n. 18. 

2 Ignatius to Leonora Osorio, dat. Rome, 1546, July or Aug. (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 564). 

3 RiBADENEIRA, 1. 3, C. 9. 

* Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 305. 

^ Polanco to Araoz, dat. Rome, Oct. 31, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 

* RiBADENEIRA, L 3, c. 9 ; Orlandinus, 1. 4, n. 8 ; cf. Lanciani, 
II , 64 seq. 


He was told that the Princess wished in this way to assist 
him and his associates in their poverty, but he never 
appropriated a penny of it; all was sent to the convents 
and benevolent institutions of Rome and an exact account 

Ignatius in the first year of his generalship entered 
the Archconfraternity of S. Spirito in Sassia with the 
promise of a yearly alms to the hospital.^ One of the 
tests which he imposed upon his novices consisted in 
ordering them to work in the Roman hospitals.^ The 
priests of the Society observed with sorrow that many 
of those whom they visited on sick-beds departed life 
without the Church's means of grace; Ignatius thereupon 
remembered the ordinance of Innocent III., ratified by the 
twelfth General Council, the tenor of which was that the 
aid of the physician of the soul should be invoked before 
that of the physician of the body. He earnestly recom- 
mended the observance of these enactments with this 
alleviation, that on the first and second day of illness a 
doctor should be allowed to attend the patient, but not 
again on the third and fourth day, unless the latter had 
in the interval made his confession. All the theologians 
and canonists of the Penitentiaria signified their approval 
in writing. The Pope was much pleased with the proposal ; 
about Epiphany in the year 1544 it began to be put into 

Two years before this the indefatigable General of the 

* RiBADENEiRA, Dichos y hechos de N. P. Ignacio (Mon. Ignat., 
Sen IV., I., 413) ; cf. also letter of Laynez, 120. 

2 The deed of admission in Mon. Ignat., Sen IV., I., 554-558. 
' Cf. Hansen, loc. cit., 145. 

* Ignatius to Cardinal Cervini, dat. Rome, June 24, 1543, and to 
Francis Xavier, dat. Rome, Jan. 30, 1544 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 261- 
C67, 271) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, n. 48. 


Jesuits had supported a regulation which was destined to 
have an important bearing for Rome and the whole of 
Italy. While the Inquisition was especially active, some- 
times too active, in the exercise of its functions in Portugal, 
here and there in Italy it seemed as if the watchmen on 
the roofs of Sion were fast asleep. " For this reason," 
wrote Ignatius to Portugal on the 28th of July 1542 to the 
Cardinals Juan Alvarez de Toledo and Giovanni Pietro 
Carafa, " I often made urgent representations ; they spoke 
repeatedly to the Pope ; now his Holiness has appointed 
six Cardinals" who were to form a Board of Inquisition. 
The Papal Bull appeared on the 21st of July 1542.^ 

The reconciliation of enemies was a work of charity 
which commended itself to the Jesuits' circle of activity .^ 
Ignatius himself travelled in the year 1548 to Tivoli and 
to Citta Sant' Angelo in order to pave the way for the 
restoration of amity between these two places, then at 
feud. He was successful in getting them to accept as 
arbitrator Cardinal de la Cueva, and also called in the 
help of Margaret of Parma and the Bishop, Archinto, and 
finally ensured the conclusion of a treaty of peace.^ 

The most difficult and most important pacification due 
to Ignatius was that between Pope Paul III. and King 
John III. of Portugal. John was afraid that his country 
might be ruined through the machinations of the Jews, who, 
in his father Manuel's reign, had been often compulsorily 
baptized but in secret remained loyal to Judaism. He 
thought that he ought to protect himself against these 

^ Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 218, 219 ; cf. also Polancus, loc. cif., n. 66. 
The Bull in Bull, VI., 344-346. Cf. infra, pp. 504 seqq. 

2 Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 618. Cf. also Anton Vinck's letter to thf 
Jesuits of Louvain and Cologne, dat. Rome, about May 1 548, in 


J Polancus, n. 228 j Orlandinus, 1. 8, n. 5. 


" New Christians " by an exceptionally severe jurisdiction 
in matters of belief on the lines of the Spanish Inquisition. 
The disputes into which he had thus been led already with 
Clement VI I.^ were renewed in an accentuated form under 
Paul 1 1 1.2 At first the Pope had suspended the last 
decrees of his predecessor,^ but on closer examination he 
confirmed on October 12, 1535, those relating to the New 
Christians, which were as just as they were lenient.* 
King John III., filled with deep hatred for these Jews in 
disguise, now tried to compass his object by means of 
diplomatic negotiations in Rome. As Charles V. inter- 
vened on his side, Paul III. gave way, for on the 23rd of 
May 1536 he ratified the institution of a permanent 
Inquisition in Portugal.^ The King disregarded the 
stipulations which the Pope had inserted to protect the 

• Cf. Vol. X. of this work, 371 seq. 

2 Cf. besides the numerous documents in Corp. dipl. Port., III., IV., 
v., and VI. ; Schafer, III., 337 ; SCHMIDT, Zeitschr. fiir Gesch., IX., 
Xb"] seq.; Ersch-Gruber, XVIII., 471 Ji?^;'. ; Atti dell' Emilia, N.S., IV., 
I, III seq. ; Kathol. Schweizerbl., I. (1885), 341 seq. ; Archiv fiir kath. 
Kichenrecht, LI II., 27 seq., and the characteristic works of Herculano 
and Kunstmann given there; see also Histor. Zeitschr., IX., 121 ; 
further, Pincheiro Chagas, Hist, de Portugal, V., Lisbon, s.a. 
Numerous documents still unpublished concerning the conflict are in 
the Secret Archives of the Vatican (*Min. brev.. Carte Fames., 2, and 
Nunz, di Portug., I., A) and in Cod. H ■^■^^ Inf. of the Ambrosian 
Library in Milan. The instructions for Girol. Capodiferro sent to 
Portugal in 1537 (dat. Feb. 17, 1537), in the Altieri Library, Rome 
(VII., E IV., f. 263), those for J. Lippomanno sent in 1542, in the 
Royal Library, Berlin (Inf. polit., XII., 67 seq\ and in the Doria 
Pamphili Archives, Rome (Istrug., I., 329 seq.). A series of documents 
relating to the subject in Cod. 264, N.B., 3, Vol, I., of the Library of 

3 Corp. dipl. Port., III., 171 seqq. 

* Ibid.., 254 seq. 

6 Ibid.., III., 302 seqq. 


New Christians, and serious complaints were raised in 
Rome, for John III. did all he could to turn the Inquisition 
into a Royal tribunal. In vain Paul III. raised protests 
against the King's arbitrary behaviour ; all the Pope's en- 
deavours on behalf of justice and moderation towards the 
Jews, and the preservation of the ecclesiastical character 
of the Inquisition, were without avail. Negotiations were 
bandied to and fro without result and fresh difficulties 
arose over and above those already existing. 

Miguel de Silva, Bishop of Viseu, a noble of the highest 
rank, had left Portugal and gone to Venice contrary to 
the King's wishes. Nevertheless, Paul III. made him a 
Cardinal and summoned him to Rome. John III. now 
confiscated his episcopal revenues and moreover forbade 
the Bishop to hold intercourse, even by writing, with his 
diocese. He was also unwilling to admit a Papal nuncio 
into the country. Ignatius took the matter very seriously, 
and wrote a confidential letter to his old friend and 
colleague Simon Rodriguez, who was resident at the court 
of Lisbon. It was reported in the Curia, he said, that 
Rodriguez gave absolution to persons who had helped the 
King in his aggression on the Cardinal of Viseu and thus 
laid themselves under the bann of the Church ; he, the 
General of the Order, was, however, unable to believe 
this ; Rodriguez indeed had no faculty empowering 
him to do so; he would, besides, thereby do injury to the 
things of God, the Church and the Holy See.^ At the 
beginning of 1542 the situation was so embittered that 
Portugal was on the point of breaking off communication 
with the Holy See.^ 

* Ignatius to Simon Rodriguez, dat. Rome, March 15, 1542. The 
letter was first published in Men. Ignat, Ser. I., I., 196-199. 

2 See the Florentine envoy's *despatch of Feb. 3, 1542 (Florentine 
State Archives). 


Ignatius, who, like many others,^ laid the blame not on 
the King but on his counsellors, sought then in every way 
to arrive at a peaceable solution.^ The dispute was pro- 
longed for some years to come; Ignatius, however, never 
halted in his exertions as peacemaker. On the 14th of 
December 1545 he wrote to Rodriguez that for the sake 
of the Inquisition and the bishopric of Viseu he had gone 
to see the Pope at Montefiascone ; he had there spoken 
very fully to the Pope and had made a favourable impres- 
sion. This communication was followed directly by 
another announcing that an agreement had been reached. 
The Pope would withdraw the brief directed against the 
action of the Inquisition ; the New Christians would be 
allowed a respite to admit of their expatriation ; after their 
departure the Portuguese Inquisition should be put on the 
same footing as the Spanish. The confiscated revenues 
of the bishopric of Viseu were to be dealt with in accord- 
ance with the advices from Lisbon ; all were to be placed 
in the hands of Cardinal Farnese.^ The desired Bull 
on the Inquisition appeared on the i6th of July 1547, 
and the New Christians were given a year's grace. The 
King was earnestly recommended to employ gentle 
measures; Cardinal Farnese was made administrator of 
Viseu, received the revenues of the bishopric, and pledged 
himself under his own hand to remit them to Cardinal 
Silva ; only a sum was to be deducted for the stipend 
of the bishop-coadjutor placed in charge of the diocese;* 

1 Thus the Portuguese nuncio (see his *report of July 13, 1535, in the 
Nunz. di Portug., I., A, f. 6, Secret Archives of the Vatican), and later 
also Paul III. (see Raynaldus, 1545, n. 58). 

2 Cf. his letter to Rodriguez of March 18 and July 28, 1542 (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 195 seq.^ 216 seq.). 

3 Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 346-350- 

* Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 193, 194, 348, 349; Cartas de S. Ignacio, 
I., 224, n. 8, 496-509 ; Raynaldus, 1547, n. 131, 132; Orlandinus, 


the nomination of the latter was to be left to the 

About this time a certain Fra Valentino Barbaran sent- 

I., 5, n. 27 ; Corp. dipl. Port., VI., r66 seq. ; Herculano, Hist, de 
Inquisi^ao em Portugal, III., 6th ed. (1897), 282 seq.; MacSwiney, 
Le Portugal et le Saint Si6ge, III., Paris, 1904, 210-212. 

^ Ignatius has quite recently been blamed for having, in the face of 
ancient Church discipline and the proposals for reform just then in 
progress, procured for Cardinal Farnese, already richly endowed with 
Church benefices, additional possession of a Portuguese bishopric. 
But Farnese was merely bishop in name and, for the sake of peace, 
Rome wished to find for the King an honourable way of retreat. A 
few years later Viseu received a new bishop. As regards the New 
Christians, the latter had agents at Rome who were trying to prevent 
the introduction of the Spanish Inquisition into Portugal. One of 
them, Diego Hernandez, wished to bring Ignatius round to his side. 
They had a two hours' conference in the Pantheon. Hernandez, 
according to a letter from Ignatius to Rodriguez of Aug, 1 7, 1 542, in 
Spanish, "made solemn professions, always bringing forward some- 
thing new digressing from the subject. I therefore determined to cut 
the matter short and gave him my oath before the Blessed Sacrament 
that in this matter my desire was the same as his, to be of the greatest 
service to all erring souls. I was, however, of opinion that no obstacle 
should be put in the way of the Inquisitors, on the assumption that 
their functions were authorized and that they carried out their duties 
properly, and that this should specially be observed in cases where the 
Inquisitors received no material recompense for their labours and 
reaped injury rather than advantage from them. He tried, however, 
always to adduce fresh reasons and to spin out the conversation. At 
last I broke it off : I said to him, he need not waste any more time on 
the subject with me and I had no wish to waste mine with him. My 
conscience forbade me to think otherwise than I did. Since then ten 
or twelve days have passed and I have not seen him again" (Mon. 
Ignat., Sen I., I., 225, 226; Cartas de S. Ignacio, I., 142, 143). For 
the wrong translation, a mutilation of this letter by A. N. Druffel 
(Ignatius von Loyola an der Romischen Kurie, Munich, 1879, 12) and 
those who have followed him, see Anal. Boll., XIII., 72 ; Duhr, S.J., 
Jesuitenfabeln, 4th ed., Freiburg i. Br., 1904, 33-39- For a criticism of 
Drufifel, see also Zeitsch. fur. kathol. Theol., IV., 380 seq. 

VOL. XII. 4 


to Paul III. a memoir containing far-reaching complaints 
against the Jesuits. They were desirous, he said, of 
reforming the whole world ; they had no permission from 
the Pope to carry out their work at S. Marta, and wished 
to drive all married women who had been untrue to the 
marriage vows from Rome, with many other accusations. 
Cardinal Crescenzi, by command of the Pope, perused the 
document and drew up a report. He considered it to be 
of no importance.^ 

In obedience to the Pope the Jesuits tranquilly pursued 
their good work among the Roman people. They 
frequently occupied the pulpit,^ and Vittoria Colonna, who 
had withdrawn into retirement with the Benedictine nuns 
of S. Anna de' Funari, asked to have one of them as her 

The General set a good example to his subordinates in 
giving instruction in Christian doctrine ; no sooner had 
he entered on his office than he began in S. Maria della 
Strada to expound the elementary principles of the 
Christian faith ; many grown-up persons were among the 
audience. Although he had little time for preparation and 
spoke an Italian strongly marked by Spanish idioms, yet 
his addresses made a great impression. He usually closed 
with the words : " Let us love God with all our heart, with 
all our soul, and all our will ! " He uttered this with 
great emphasis and animated visage ; many, as Laynez and 

* Ignatius to Miguel Torres, dat. Rome, Oct. 13 and 18, 1547 (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 447, 448 ; Cartas de S. Ignacio, I., 304, 305). Druffel 
has not understood the Spanish letter which forms the source of this 
report ; what Barbaran wrote has been put by Druffel {loc. cit.^ 28) in 
the mouth of Cardinal Crescenzi, " the incorruptible." 

2 Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 774 ; Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 332, 373. 

3 Report to the Spanish Jesuits, dat. Rome, 1545, about May (Mon. 
Ignat, Ser. I., I., 306, 307}. 


Ribadeneira who both saw and heard him testify, sought 
the confessional forthwith in deep contrition.^ 

Among the Roman clergy were many, as Polanco wrote 
to Spain in 1547, "badly in need of instruction." On this 
account Nadal gavd three times a week in S. Eustachio a 
lecture on the professional duties of the priesthood ; the 
Vicar of the Pope enjoined attendance on all who had 
the cure of souls.^ The success attending this regulation 
gave rise, apparently, to another determination. From all 
parts candidates for Holy Orders came to Rome who were 
unfitted for their office ; it was therefore decided in 1547 
that in future none should be ordained who had not 
previously made a general confession to a Jesuit and had 
undergone an examination in morals and learning by that 
Order. Ignatius had no other course open to him than to 
undertake this arduous task at least temporarily. " Up to 
the present," he wrote to Louvain in December 1548, "we 
have given a certificate of fitness to hardly a quarter of 
those who have presented themselves."^ 

The new Order was reserved with regard to the religious 
direction of women. When Ignatius and his companions 
came to Rome, he said to them, " We must be very careful 
to avoid intercourse with women, for there are many of 
high station "* whose influence and example might be of 
great advantage to many souls. Such a one, in his opinion, 

' Ribadeneira, De actis, etc., n. 47 ; (T/C also Maffeius, 1. 2, c. 14. 

' Polanco to Araoz, dat. Rome, Oct. 31, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 
617); Report to Araoz and the Jesuits of Louvain and Cologne, dat. 
Rome, Oct. 31, 1547, and 1548, end of December {ibid., Ser. I., I„ 617 ; 
II., 286). 

3 Bishop Archinto to Ignatius, dat. Bologna, Dec. 17, 1547 ; Opinion 
of Ignatius, dat. Rome, 1548, end of January ; letter to the Jesuits of 
Louvain and Cologne, dat. Rome, 1548, end of Dcccaiber (Mon. Ignat. 
Ser. I., I., 6158, 703, 704 ; II., 286). 

* " Illustri," Autobiography, n. 97 (p. 95). 


was that virile character Margaret of Austria, whose marriage 
with the young Farnese was so unfortunate. Ignatius 
was confessor to her and her household, and when in 1 545 
she gave birth to twins, he was called upon to baptize 
one of them.^ To please Cardinal Farnese, Ignatius also 
undertook that his Order should draw up rules and act as 
confessors ^ for the enclosed nuns near St. Peter's, known 
as the "Murate"; but this was an exceptional case. Re- 
quests often came to him from pious women living in the 
world, from individual religious, and from entire convents 
of nuns to be received into the obedience of his Society, 
but Ignatius in all such cases refused.^ " We who live 
here in the Curia," he said, " see every day how things 
are with the Franciscans and Dominicans and their 
coiivents of nuns, how much embarrassment is caused to 
the friars ; we should fare no better."* 

Nevertheless, it seemed at one time as if a female 
offshoot of the Society would spring up in Rome. The 
widow Isabel Roser, who had once been Loyola's pupil in 
spiritual things and in temporal matters his great bene- 
factress, came in 1545 from Barcelona to Rome. She and 
some other women asked Ignatius to affiliate them to his 
Society. On his refusal they made such clamorous 
entreaties to Paul III. to order the General to receive 
them, that the Pope granted their request. Thus Isabel 
Roser, Lucrezia Bradine, and Francisca Cruyllas took the 

* Report to the Spanish members of the Order, dat. Rome, beginning 
1544; Ribadeneira and Faber to Araoz, dat. Rome, 1545, Aug. 29 
(Alon. Ignat, Ser. I., I., 290, 316,317). 

3 Polanco to Araoz, dat. Rome, Oct. 31, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 
I., 613). 

3 Cf. POLANCUS, Chronicon, 2, 475 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 421). 

'^ To Miguel Torres, dat. Rome, Sept. 10, 1546 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 
I-, 421) 


solemn vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience at the 
hands of Ignatius as Superior of their Order.^ 

Isabel Roser betook herself with great devotion to the 
work at S. Marta^ but she had no idea of obedience. 
The direction of the new sisters cost much time and trouble, 
and they and those under their protection required bodily 
support. Roser in addition was surrounded by a swarm 
of relations; it was said in Rome that the Jesuits wished to 
get possession of all their means and were keeping them 
in Rome by force. Through Ardinghello, Ignatius had 
representations made to the Pope, who was in residence at 
Orvieto, that such occupations were not befitting for men 

* For the "supplicatio ad Pontificem, ut emittere Societatis vota 
permitterentur," cf. the remarks by POLANCUS, Chronicon, n. 87, 
p. 149, n. I. A document of Dec. 25, 1545, concerning a gift of Isabel 
Roser, wherein Ignatius appears as " Prepdsito de la venerable 
Compaiiia de Jesus, Perlado y Superior de la dicha Sefiora Isabella, y 
en cujus manibus ella hizo profession" is given in the Cartas de S. 
Ignacio, I., 471, 472. "La hermana y madre Isabel Roser," " Sor 
Lucrecia," " La Madre Sor Lucrecia," " La Hermana Cruyllas," say the 
Jesuits Antonio Araoz and Andres de Oviedo in letters which (dat. 
Valencia, Dec. 22, 1545, and Gandia, Jan. 26, 1547) they sent to 
Bartolome Ferron, S.J., and to S. Ignatius at Rome. Araoz 
addresses I. Roser in a letter from Valencia to Rome, Dec. 22, IS45) 
as " Charisima Hermana." An old notice of I. Roser's letter to 
Ignatius, dat. Barcelona, Dec. 10, 1547, says: " Haec fuit professa 
Societatis, propter quam deinde cautum fuit, ne curam susciperemus 
monacharum" (Epistolae mixtae ex variis Europae, locis ab anno 1537 
and 1 556 scriptae, I., Matriti, 1898, 245-247, 335, 450 ; cf. also ibid., 29). 
That Cruyllas vowed "de commissione suae Sanctitatis obedi- 
entiam . . . Ignatio, et forsan pro tempore existenti Praeposito 
Societatis . . ., atque castitatem et paupertatem ... in ejusdem 
manibus solemniter," appears from a document drawn up at Rome, 
Nov. 3, 1546, at the command of Paul III., by his vicar, Bishop 
Filippo Archinto (Acta Sanctorum, Julii VII., n. 416-420). 

2 Ferron to Rodriguez, dat. April 12, 1546 (Mon. Ignat, Scr. I., I., 


who ought to be working all over the world in the great 
interests of the Church.^ The Pope agreed, and gave 
directions that the Order should be released from the 
obligation of receiving women into their obedience or of 
undertaking permanently the direction of their souls.^ 
Accordingly, in the autumn of 1546 a Papal dispensation 
released Roser and her companion Cruyllas from their 
vows of poverty and obedience; they were, however, per- 
mitted to enjoy the graces and indulgences of the Society 
exactly as if they were still members.^ Ignatius wrote 
to Roser telling her that he therefore had no longer any 
claim on her as a spiritual daughter under his obedience, 
but that he would always regard her as a good and 
affectionate mother, as indeed she had been for so many 
years.* Isabel felt herself deeply hurt; she even made a 
claim for damages which, however, the courts did not 
uphold.^ Full of complaints and anger, she returned to 
Barcelona ; but in a few months' time she was writing from 
there for forgiveness, and later she made a distribution of 
her property and became a Franciscan nun.^ 

Ignatius had impressed a special stamp on his foundation 
and he took care that it should not be effaced. The 
suggestion that he should amalgamate his Order with that 
of the Somaschi he flatly refused.'^ Miani's community 

* Ferron to Rodriguez, dat. Rome, Nov. 21, 1545 ; Ignatius to Torres, 
dat. Rome, Oct. 9, 1546, and March 3, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I,, I., 

329, 330, 437-441, 488-493). Cf. also RiBADENEIRA, Vita, 1. 3, 

c. 14 ; Maffeius, 1. 2, c. 7 ; Astrain, I., 186 seq. 
2 Polancus, Chronicon, r\. 172 ; cf. supra, p. 38 (Mare Magnum). 
^ Acta Sanctorum, loc. cit., n. 419. 
^ Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., I., 424, 425. 
6 Ibid., Ser. IV., I., 645-659. 
^ Epistolae Mixtae, I., 449, 450; II., 54. CREIXELL, 113. 

• To P. F. de Medde, dat. Rome, March 15, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. 
I., I,, 474^^^.). 


had less affinity with the Jesuits than the disciples ot 
Gaetano di Tiene ; the name of " Theatines " given to 
the latter was for many years extended also to the 
former. Ignatius tried very seriously to come to an 
arrangement with Cardinal Carafa for the recall of the 
Theatines to Rome^ but he was steadily averse to any 
project for a fusion of the two Orders, and Cardinal Carafa 
was, on the whole, of the same opinion himself.^ Later, 
in 1 55 1, the Barnabites made similar overtures to Ignatius, 
but he rejected them, although they had the strong support 
of Archbishop Sauli of Genoa.^ On the other hand, 
Ignatius welcomed with delight the invitation of the strict 
Carthusian Order — without detriment to the individuality 
of the one or the other constitution — to mutual approxima- 
tion and special communion in prayer and other good 

With equal determination the founder set himself to 
hold his spiritual children aloof from the strivings of ecclesi- 
astical ambition. King Ferdinand I. in 1546 longed to see 
Le Jay made Bishop of Trieste. Ignatius entreated the King 
to renounce this scheme, but Ferdinand, on the contrary, 
desired Paul III. to command Le Jay to accept the dignity 
in virtue of his obedience to the Holy See; the King's 
ambassador at Rome was instructed to bring all pressure 
to bear. Thereupon Ignatius, as he reported to corre- 
spondents in Spain, made " incredible efforts " to frustrate 
the nomination. He succeeded in keeping the matter in 
suspense until the King declared that he would no longer 

* Ignatius to Giovanni Bernardino Scotti, dated Rome, Aug. 18 and 
Sept. 8, 1548 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., II., 194-19S, 229). 

2 RiBADENEiRA, Dichos, etc., Gobierno, n. 91 (Mon. Ignat., Ser, 
IV., I., 439, 440) ; BrOMATO, II., 101 seq. 

' RiBADENEIRA, loC. Cit. 

' Cartas de S. Ignacio, I., 403, 447, 448. 


insist on his wishes ; Ignatius ordered Masses of thanks- 
giving to be said and the Te Deum to be sung.^ 

To whatever extent his disciples might aim at Christian 
perfection and union with God through love, their master 
never estimated their progress by their demeanour nor 
even by the greater or less promptitude of their disposition, 
nor by their sensible enjoyment of prayer, but by the 
measure in which they exerted themselves to curb their 
unruly inclinations.^ " Overcome thyself" was his favourite 
maxim. Far from depreciating bodily asceticism, he set 
a value on " fasts, the use of the discipline and other instru- 
ments of penance as useful and under certain circumstances 
necessary," but he esteemed far higher the subjection of 
an ambitious and selfish spirit.^ Obedience he asked for 
before everything else, not a forced and slavish, but a 
willing and high-hearted obedience. From time to time 
he would set a test. This happened at the beginning of 
1 548, when the college at Messina was established. Every- 
one in the house was to make a written declaration 
whether he was ready to go there, and when there to take 
up any office that the General might think good to appoint 
him to. Canisius assured him that he was equally willing 
to remain in Rome or to go to Sicily, India, or wherever 
else it might be ; if it must be to Sicily, he was then ready 
to go as cook, gardener, porter, scholar, or teacher in any 

* Ignatius to Ferdinand I., dat. Rome, Dec. 1546 ; Ferron to Torres, 
dat. Rome, March 2, 1547 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 450-453, 460-467) ; 
Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Venice, Sept. 25, 1546, and Cardinal Pio of 
Carpi to Ferdinand I., dat. Rome, Dec. 4, 1546 (Epist. P. Pasch. 
Broeti, 314-332, 392, 393). 

2 RiBADENEiRA, De actis, etc., n. 64, and Vita, 1. 5, c. 10. Cf. the 
Exercises : second week : " De emendatione et reformatione vitae." 

3 RIBADENEIRA, De ratione S. Ignatii in gubernando, c. 2, n. 4, 5 
(Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 447); Ignatius to the College of Coimbra, 
dat. Rome, May 7, 1547 {ibid., Ser. I,, I., 507). 


department. All the five-and-thirty members who were 
with him gave wholly similar answers.^ 

In order to train his children in humility Ignatius often 
allowed their acts of negligence and other faults to be 
inveighed against from the reading-desk of their dining- 
hall by a lay brother, Antonio Rion, a man of very humble 
origin who was an adept in the art of cooking and also had 
the gift of administering rebukes which could be as witty 
as they were sharp.^ At the same time Ignatius always 
made allowance for individual temperament. One, said 
Ribadeneira, he would treat with the tender love of a 
mother, another with the authoritative love of a father. 
In distributing the more important offices and tasks,^ " in 
virtue of holy obedience," he often kept in view the 
inclinations of those under his control.* In converse 
with others Ignatius was earnest and thoughtful, yet for 
all his economy of words always friendly, so that his 
spiritual sons could say that they never went away from 
him other than contented and happy.^ 

* Braunsberger, I., 262, 263. 

' O. Manareus, Comment, 128 ; Maffeius, 1. 3, c. 6. 
' Ribadeneira, De ratione, etc., c. 4, and Dichos, etc., Gobierno, 
n. 12 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 419, 454). 

* Dictamina S. P. Ignatii generalia, collecta a P. Lancicio (Mon, 
Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 478). 

fi Responsio P. Manarei, n. 11 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 513); 
Dictamina {t'h'd., 491). See also Carol. Linek, S.J., Imago absolutis- 
simae virtutis . . . verbis et exemplis S. P. Ignatii de Loyola , , 
expressa, Pragae, 1717, 214-221. 


Constitutions of the Society of Jesus. — Its Work 
IN Europe and the Indies. 

The principles on which Ignatius governed his Society 
could not remain in perpetuity as an unwritten tradition. 
There was need of a rule consolidated in writing. The 
professed members resident in Rome therefore met re- 
peatedly and drew up a series of resolutions for the life of 
the new organization.^ 

Their work was handed over for complete revision in 
1 541 to Ignatius and Codure ; but as the latter died soon 
after, the task fell solely into the hands of Ignatius;^ he 
began to commit his work to writing in 1547.^ About the 
same time he prepared, at the wish of his first companions 
and in close co-operation with his secretary Polanco, an 
amplified copy of that first draft of the rule of the Society 
which was contained in the Bull of confirmation of 1540. 
In this, not to mention other alterations, the three vows of 
poverty, chastity, and obedience are designated as solemn 
vows, while this at first had only been predicated of the vow 
of chastity. At the same time it was clearly declared that 
the supreme government normally was vested in the 
General. Together with " vows of the professed " the 

^ First published in the Constitutiones Societatis Jesu lat. et hisp., 
300-313, 316-329, 
2 Astrain, I., 125. 

5 Ephemerides P. Nadal (Epistolae P. H. Nadal, II., 2). 



simple vows of the coadjutors and the scholastics were also 
mentioned. The first Papal confirmation of this second 
and final "Formula of the Institute" of the Society was 
contained in the Bull issued by Julius III. on the 2ist of 
July 1550.1 

The first draft of the Constitutions was finished by 
Ignatius at the beginning of 1550.^ He then summoned 
all the professed living out of Rome, who could conveniently 
attend, and other prominent members of the Society to 
the capital, and there laid his work before them for ex- 
amination. From the notes which each one individually 
made^ he introduced alterations with Polanco's assistance. 
Even then he looked upon the work as still lacking com- 
pletion. From 1552 onwards Nadal was ordered to 
promulgate and explain the Constitutions in Spain, 
Portugal, Germany, and Italy ; Antonio Quadrio did the 
same in India. Experience was to be the test of all. As 
regards their substance the rules were now, generally 
speaking, completed ; verbal changes Ignatius continued 
to make here and there up to his death in 1556. In 1558 
at the first General Chapter of the Order they were, after 
improvement in some unimportant particulars, confirmed 
and held the force of law.* As, in their leading principles, 

* Litterae Apostolicae, 57-71 ; Astrain, I., 126-134. 

^ First published in Constitutiones lat. et hisp., 365-418. 

* Some are given in the Const. Soc. Jesu lat. et hisp., 337, 338. 

* At that time also Polanco's Latin translation was compared with 
the Spanish original (there is a photographic reproduction by DaneSI, 
Rome, 1908) and approved by the assembly (Ignatius to Achilles, 
dat. Rome, 1548, May 30; to Torres, dat. 1548, Sept. i ; to Oviedo, 
dat. 1548, Dec. 8 ; to Viola, dat. 1549, Oct. 28 ; Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 
II., 126, 214, 268, 584, 585; Ephemerides P. H. Nadal: Epistolae 
P. H. Nadal, II., 2, 4, 7-10 ; I. I. DE LA TORRE, S.J., in the Constitu- 
tiones lat. et hisp., vi, viii-ix). Many later Popes from Gregory XIII. 
down to Leo XIII. ha^'e approved and confirmed thece Constitutiones, 


the Constitutions were fully shaped at the time of the death 
of Paul III,, this seems the proper place to form an 
appreciation of them. 

Ignatius had, it would appear, read the rules of the 
earlier Orders ; ^ but when he came to write his own the 
only works upon his table were the Gospels and the 
Imitatio Christi. Following the rules concerning choice 
which he had laid down in the Book of the Exercises, he 
pondered the pro and contra of each particular question 
not merely once but repeatedly ; later on he submitted 
the subject to renewed examination. He often wrote 
down the result on a sheet of paper and laid the latter on 
the altar on which he was wont to say Mass ; hereupon 
he prayed to God for illumination ^ just as if he had not 
yet taken any action at all. Gonsalvez relates that 
Ignatius had told him that at such times God had granted 
him many illuminations. " He told me," Gonsalvez con- 
tinues, " that he could assert this all the more easily as he 
was in the habit of writing down daily the experiences of 
his soul. He read aloud to me a considerable portion of 
these."* If not all, yet a certain number of these revelations 
have been preserved, and they form a remarkable memorial 
of Christian mysticism.* 

The actual Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, which 

which are vahd to this day (Constitutiones lat. et hisp., l). For the 
constitution of the Society, cf. Heimbucher, III., 2nd ed., 21-28. 

' Bartoli, 1. 3, n. 3. 

2 Orlandinus, 1. 10, n. 54, 55. Cf. also Constitutiones lat. et hisp., 
348, 349- 

^ Autobiography, n. 100, loi (pp. 97, 98). 

* A fragment had already been given by Orlandini (1. 10, n. 59-62). 
They were first published in Spanish from the original transcript by 
Ignatius in the Constitutiones lat. et hisp., 349-363. Hence they 
were translated in French by L. Michel, S.J., Hist, de St. Ignace de 
Loyola, II. (1893), 392-412. 


corsists of ten parts, are preceded by an "Examen"; it 
states what tests the Order applies to those who are to 
be accepted as members and how the latter for their part 
test the life of the Order before pledging themselves for 
ever by its vows. 

" The object of this Society," so we are told at the very 
beginning of the "Examen," is "not only to pursue the 
salvation and perfectioning of the individual soul by God's 
grace, but, with the help of the latter, to seek zealously the 
salvation and perfectioning of the soul of our neighbour." 
The same thought recurs in the course of the Constitu- 
tions themselves. " The particular object of the Society 
is this: we wish to help our own souls apd the souls of 
our neighbours to reach the final end for which we have 
been created." The Society of Jesus is " founded for the 
greater glory of God, for the highest general good, and the 
profit of souls." ^ 

Other Orders had attached to personal sanctification, 
the common aim of all monastic life, such accessory 
observances as meditation on divine things, or solemn 
celebration of worship, or the service of the sick, or other 
charitable works ; in like manner Ignatius set as a special 
task for his community the salvation and sanctification 
of others ; this would redound to the greater glory of God 
and to the extension of His kingdom over the whole 
world under the leadership and through the imitation of 
Christ. Among the Mendicant Orders, and especially 
among the Dominicans and Franciscans, preaching and 
similar agencies had been employed already; but Ignatius 
had set the salvation of souls more emphatically in the fore- 
ground, and had adapted with greater consistence, to this 
end, the choice of members of the Order, their training and 
education, and the whole disciplinary system of their lives. 
* Examen, c. i, n. 2 ; Constitutiones, P. 3, c. i, n. 9 ; P. 4, prooem. 


A repulsive outward appearance, disordered intellect, 
intractability of character, bad reputation, uncathoHc 
habits of thought were barriers to admission. None also 
could be admitted who had worn, even if it were only as 
a novice, the clothing of another Order. "For," said 
Ignatius, "such a one ought to have remained true to 
his first vocation."^ Some were received as " indifferent" ; 
as long as it was uncertain whether they were qualified 
for the priesthood or fitted for lay brotherhood, they 
were to hold themselves in readiness for either alternative 
and submit to be appointed to the one sphere or the 
other at the discretion of their Superiors.'^ 

The term of probation, in the narrower sense of the word, 
did not last, as in other Orders, for a term of one but of 
two years. During this period novices had to undergo 
various tests ; each one had to give a month to the spiritual 
exercises, to visit the sick in hospitals, and go from door 
to door on a quest for alms ; they had also to attend to 
the house and do other domestic services. Moreover, they 
were bound to explain the Catechism, and, if they were 
priests, to practise themselves in preaching, and in hearing 

On the expiry of the probationary period it was usual 
in other orders to proceed at once to the assumption of 
the solemn vows. In this instance Ignatius made a 
trenchant alteration. By his rule novices only took 

* Constitutiones, P. 1., c. 1-4 ; Examen, c. 2, n. 36. The most 
recent edition, 3 vols., of the " Institutum Societatis Jesu" (Florentiae, 
1 892-1 893), gives the Constitutions together vi^ith the Examen in 
2 vols., pp. 1-145. It is the Latin translation in general use in the 
Order. For the "Institutum," cf. Heimbucher, III., 2nd ed., 10, 
21, 22. Newest edition of the Constitutiones: Romae, Typ. Vatic, 

2 Examen, c. r, n. li. 

' Ibid.^ c. I, n. 12 ; c. 1, n. 9-16, 28. 


upon them the so-called scholastic vows, namely, the 
simple vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, together 
with the promise to allow themselves at a later period, on 
the injunction of their Superior, to be incorporated finally 
into the Order as a professed or formal coadjutor; these 
final vows, however, were only confirmed after a long and 
varied probation. In most cases he had to spend yet 
another year as a scholastic in study; when this was 
ended, there then remained yet a third year of probation 
to go through ; during this period he had to regain in the 
" school of the heart " what he might have lost of fervour 
in the school of learning. Lay brothers were already 
excluded from the circle of the professed, inasmuch as 
priests only could assume the solemn vows.^ The former, 
however, and generally speaking all who, after the two 
years' probation, had taken simple vows, had the consola- 
tion of knowing that in virtue even of the latter they were 
sons of the Order in a true and specific sense.^ 

A large discretion was left to the Superiors of the Order 
in the matter of dismissing incompetent and unworthy 

* Examen, c. i, n. 10 ; c. 4, n. 16 ; c. 7, n. i ; Constitutiones, P. 5, 
c. I, n. 3 ; c. 2, n. I ; P. 10, n. 7. For coadjutors, see supra, p. 37. 

2 "Vera et propria religiosi," thus Gregory XIII. in the Bull 
"Ascendente Domino" of May 25, 1584, in express terms (Bull., 
VIII., 461-464). Since the essential portion of the Order, that of 
the professed, take solemn vows in the canonical sense, the Society 
of Jesus thus belongs not to "ecclesiastical congregations" but to 
the religious orders in the strictest acceptation of the words. Pius V. 
declared in the Brief " Dum indefessae" of July 7, 1571, that the 
Society was one of the "Ordines Mendicantium"(BuIl., VII., 923-926) ; 
Gregory XIII., in the Bull before mentioned, calls them "Ordo 
regulaiis" {ibid., VIII., 459, 461). The Council of Trent uses the 
term " Religio Clericorum " (Sess., 25, De reg. et mon., c. 16). It is 
not a monastic order but an order of regular clergy. For the expres- 
sion "clericus saecularis Societatis Jesu," see Braunsberger, III., 
743. 744- 


members. This too not only in the case of novices but of 
those under the scholastic vows ; on their part certainly 
the dedication and obligation u'ere binding for life, but 
the vows were taken on the tacit understanding that their 
vows were revocable, on valid grounds, by the Order and 
their membership dissoluble. In certain cases also a pro- 
fessed might be dismissed, and even the General himself.^ 

For the spiritual life of each member effectual support 
was forthcoming ; the daily Masses, frequent confession 
and communion, examination of conscience twice a day, 
meditation, the recitation of the Rosary, festivals of Our 
Lady, spiritual reading, private exhortations, and edifying 
readings during meals.^ All who had not become professed 
or formal coadjutors had to renew their vows twice a year.^ 
All the members must open their whole conscience to their 
directors or to the Superior in order to guard against self- 
deception.* The professed also must be ready, at least 
once a year, to give an account of the state of their 
conscience to the Superior.^ It must be each one's en- 
deavour to direct his undertakings with a good and pure 
intention, more from love of God than from hope of reward 
and fear of punishment.*' 

In order that ambition may be shut out by bolt and 
bar, it is strongly prohibited to strive for any post of 
dignity or pre-eminence in the Order. The professed have 
to take a special vow in this sense, and even to promise to 
inform on anyone who shall solicit such honours, and the 

1 Constitutiones, P. 2, c. 2, n. 3, 4 ; c. 3, n. 5, 6 A ; P. 5, c. 4 B j P. 9, 
c. 4, n. 7- 

2 Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. 5, 10, 20, 21 ; P. 4, n. 3, 4 B ; P. 6, c. 3, n. i. 

3 Ibid., P. 4, c. 4, n. 5 D ; P. 5, c. 4, n. 6. 

* Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. 12. 
5 Ibid., P. 6, c. I, n. 2. 

* Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. 26. 


acceptance even of any dignity outside the Order can only 
be permitted when this is enjoined under pain of sin by one 
having authority to do so.^ 

The love of relations must be pure and spiritual.^ "The 
closer a man draws to God," exhorts Ignatius, " and the 
more generously he devotes himself to the Divine Majesty, 
the more generous will he find God to be towards him."^ 
This magnanimous love of God must be the fundamental 
law and mainspring of the whole life of the Order; from 
this as from its source must spring also the desire to draw 
ever nearer to the Incarnate Son of God on His Cross and 
to imitate Him in the joyful endurance of suffering and 

The scope of the vows of the Order is accurately 
measured in the Constitutions. In order to avoid any 
appearance of covetousness, all spiritual functions must be 
fulfilled without remuneration. Neither the professed nor 
the formal coadjutors can hold or inherit any personal 
property ; the houses and churches of the professed have 
no fixed incomes ; professed and non-professed alike must 
support themselves on alms.^ On the other hand, colleges 
and noviciates have fixed incomes whereby the inmates, 
free from anxieties of subsistence, can devote their whole 
attention to teaching and learning. Those who have not 
yet taken the solemn vows can certainly still hold property, 
but not at their own free disposition ; they must also be 
ready to renounce it before taking the solemn vows, and 
even earlier still if the Superior should at any time enjoin 

' Constitutiones, P. lo, n. 6. 
2 Luke xiv. 26, Matt. xix. 29, Examen, c. 4, n. 7. 
^ Constitutiones, P. 3, c. i, n. 22. 

* Examen, c. 4, n. 44 ; Const. procEm. C/. Frins in Wetzer u. 
Weltes Kirchenlexikon, VI., 2nd ed., 1384 
^ Constitutiones, P. 6, c. 2, n. 2-4, 7, 12. 


them to do so. Without permission of the latter no one 
can make use of anything or dispose thereof by loan or 
alienation.^ Also, as opportunity occurs, each one must 
practically experience that he is a poor man. Poverty is 
and always must be the "strong bulwark of the life of the 
Order " ; for that reason all the professed must swear to 
withstand any alteration of the rules concerning poverty; 
in such a case it would behove them to make the regula- 
tions more severe.^ 

As regards the vow of chastity, one exhortation is 
addressed to all " to watch with the utmost care over the 
doorways of the senses, especially the eyes, ears, and 
tongue, in order that all that is irregular may be kept at a 
distance." They must be assiduous in observing silence 
when this is enjoined, in having regard to reserve and 
edification when called upon to speak, in maintaining a 
modest demeanour, a composure of step and bearing in all 
their movements. " Fasts, vigils, and similar corporal hard- 
ships are certainly not to be indulged in immoderately," 
but also " not so sparingly as to chill the fervour of the 
spiritual, and inflame the lower and merely human motions 
of the soul." In private no room must be left for "in- 
dolence, the beginning of all vices " ; a strict regulation of 
daily life is therefore necessary.^ 

Obedience was a primary consideration in the spiritual 
contingent levied by the knight of Loyola for the army of 
the Church. His soldiers must be capable of "any task, 
not openly sinful, however difficult and repugnant to the 
senses " it may be. They must be trained to exhibit 
obedience not only where formal obligations command, but 

^ Examen, c. i, n. 4 ; c. 4, n. 4 ; Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 2, n. 5 ; 
c. 4E. 
* Constitutiones, P. 3, c. i, n. 7, 8, 25 ; P. 6, c. 2, n. i, 11 A, H, 
^ Ibid.^ P. 3, c. I, n. 4, 5, 15 ; c. 2, n, 2 ; P. 6, c. 3, n. i. 


even on the slightest intimation of their Superior's wish.^ 
Commands must be carried out promptly, completely, and 
perseveringly ; yet their fulfilment must not be merely 
mechanical and external. Ignatius insists repeatedly on 
conscious, spontaneous, joyful obedience; therefore his 
subordinates must make " the wiJl and judgment of their 
Superior the standard measure of their own judgment and 
will." 2 In this sense they are to practise a "blind obedi- 
ence";' blind not in relation to the thing commanded, 
but certainly in relation to the deceits and illusions of 
their own darkness, pettiness of soul, and sensuality. 

St. Basil in one of his monastic maxims had once 
compared obedience to a carpenter's tool:* in like manner 
Ignatius drew his image from the staff in an old man's 
hand ; he did not even forget to repeat, at least in a few 
words, the comparison that St. Francis of Assisi had 
worked out in such detail for his disciples^ — that the 
perfectly obedient man resembled an inanimate corpse.^ 

' Constitutiones, P. 3, c. i, n. 23 ; P. 6, c. i, n. i. 

- Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. 23. 

^ The translation has " caeca quadam obedientia," the Spanish 
original simply "con obedientia ciega " (P. 6, c. i, n. i). Francesco 
Suarez supports this doctrine of blind obedience by many sayings of 
fathers and teachers of ancient Christendom and of the Middle Ages, 
and concludes : " Ignatius clearly had either borrowed his teaching 
from them or at least given expression to it in a like spirit to theirs" 
(Tractatus de Religione Societatis Jesu, 1. 4, c. 15, n.4-11 : Opera, ed. 
Car. Berton, XVI., Parisiis, 1866, 778-782). Cf. also Duhr, Jesuiten- 
fabeln, 531-533; Heimbucher, III., -in^ ed., 27; Heiner, Die 
Jesuiten, Munich, 1906, 40-46. 

* Constitutiones Monasticae, c. 22, n. 5 (MiGNE, Patr. Gr., XXXI., 

° S. BONAVENTURA, Legenda (major) S. Francisci, c. 6 (Seraphici 
Doctoris S. Bonaventurae legendae duae de VitaS. Francisci Seraphici, 
Ad Claras Aquas, 1S98, 90). 

^ Constitutiones, P. 6, c. r, n. i. 


In order to attain this perfection we ought, Ignatius 
warns us, "to have God, our Creator and Lord, before our 
eyes in order that for His sake a man may render obedience 
to his fellow-man," " to look upon our Superior whomso- 
ever he be as the representative of Christ," and therefore to 
give as " prompt obedience to his word " as though it came 
from the mouth of Christ.^ At the same time the Constitu- 
tions repeatedly concede the right to the subordinate to 
make counter-representations to the Superior; only they 
must have been made the subject of previous prayer and 
be accompanied with the resolve to do, as best, what the 
Superior finally determines.^ Ignatius also adopts the 
clause in the Dominican Constitutions^ that, the vows of 
the Order excepted, the regulations of the Order as such 
do not bind under sin;* in that case the Superior must 

* Constitutiones, P. 6, c. i, n. i ; P. 3, c. i, n. 23. St Benedict had 
already taught the same : " Obedientia, quae majoribus praebetur, 
Deo exhibetur ; ipse enim dixit : Qui vos audit me audit" [Lc. 10, 16] 
(Regula Sancti Patris Benedicti, c. 5, ed. Edm. Schmidt, O.S.B., 
Ratisbonae, 1892, 27, 28). Benedict also describes obedient monks as 
" voluntatem propriam deserentes," " ambulantes alieno judicio et 
imperio" {ibid., 26, 27). 

2 Examen, c. 8 A ; Constitutiones, P. 3, c. 2, n. i ; P. 5, c. 4 F ; 
P. 7, c. 2 J. 

3 "Volumus et declaramus ut Constitutiones nostrae non obligent 
nos ad culpam, sed ad penam, nisi propter preceptum vel con- 
temptum" (Constitutiones Ordinis Praedicatorum, Prologus, recension 
of St. Raymond of Pennafort, given by P. Heinr. Denifle in Archiv 
fiir Literatur und Kirchengesch. des Mittelalters, V., 534). 

* " Obligar ci peccado mortal ni venial": "Obligationem ad pecca- 
tum mortale vel veniale inducere" (Constitutiones, P. 6, c. 5). That 
the expression " obligatio ad peccatum," occurring also in the 
Franciscan and Dominican rules, does not mean an obligation to 
commit sin but an obligation incurring sin or " under sin," if violated, 
is recognized by Ranke, Gieseler, Steitz, Gardiner, and other Pro- 
testant scholars and is now pretty generally admitted {cf. DUHR, 
Jesuitenfabeln,^ 525, 541), 


enjoin something in virtue of obedience. Besides this 
Superiors can, on good grounds, release a subordinate from 
the observance of a particular rule.^ 

The General of the Society of Jesus, as sketched by 
Ignatius, ought not to limit himself to the sanctification 
of those under him, he must aim also at influencing 
through them the world around. The renunciation of the 
world did not drive the hero of Pampeluna, as it had 
driven the other great monastic founders, to silent, sunlit 
mountain peaks or to caverns hidden from the approach 
of men ; Ignatius went in search of sinners in great cities ; 
he bade his young followers cross the seas to deal blows 
at heathendom. But as yet most of those who rallied 
round him were not yet stout enough to fight under his 
banner ; they must first be schooled and trained. To this 
end therefore the colleges were called into being, and with 
this aim in view the youthful scions of the Order were here 
instructed in frequent disputations, trained as preachers and 
Christian instructors, exercised in literary compositions. 
None could become professed until he had spent four years 
in theological study and gone through severe examinations. 

The scholastics must have a fund of bodily and spiritual 
health to draw upon ; they were therefore never to be 
deprived of their needful times of sleep and not to be too 
much engrossed in household duties, nor were they also to 
study too long at a stretch or at unsuitable times. Prayers 
and penitential exercises were not to take up so much of 
their time as of that of the novices ; for, as the Constitu- 
tions express it, " God will be as well pleased, indeed 
better pleased, if with a good intention they serve Him by 
devotion to those studies which, so to speak, make a claim 
upon the whole man." ^ When ordained priests they must 

^ Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 10 B ; P. 9, c. 3, n. 8 D. 

2 Ibid., P. 3, c. 2, n. 4 ; P. 4, c. 4, n. i, 2 ; c. 6, n. 2, 3. 


associate themselves with all the means afforded by the 
Catholic Church for the fostering of piety: prayer and 
Holy Mass, the confessional, preaching and catechizing, 
spiritual exercises, and the labours of the pen. In the 
vows of the professed and formal coadjutors great stress 
is laid on the instruction of children in the elements 
of the Christian faith, since, says Ignatius, in this way 
" a great help is given to souls and a high service to 

The wide powers conferred by the Holy See on these 
apostolic workers are to be used with wisdom and discre- 
tion and with the wholly unalloyed intention of making 
them profitable to souls only.^ The field of labour was 
coextensive with the world. Their fourth solemn vow 
binds the professed to go whithersoever the Pope's word 
commands them, without even asking him for money for 
their journey or for any other sort of temporal aid. As often 
as a new Pope is chosen the General must inform him of 
this vow and of its scope.^ The General can send all, 
even the non-professed, to any place and in the perform- 
ance of any office coming within the purview cf the Society. 
His fundamental principle must be that " the more general 
a good is, the more divine is its character ; " therefore those 
spheres of spiritual service are to be preferred through 
which the influence of good may have the widest expan- 
sion : bishoprics, principalities, magistracies, seats of learn- 
ing and universities, and great nations.* 

Another engine of activity touched more remotely the 
salvation of souls, and yet in the hands of the Society 
of Jesus became a powerful lever thereto: this was the 

1 Constitutiones, P. 5, c. 3, n. 3, 6 B ; c. 4, n. 2 ; P. 7, c. 4, n. 2-1 1. 

2 Ibid.^ ?. 10, n. 12. 

3 Ibid., P. 5, c. 3, n. 3 ; P. 7, c. i, n. i, 3, 8. 
« Ibid., P. 7, c. 2 D, E ; P. 9, c. 3, n. 9. 


education of extern scholars. In the first conception of 
the founder this had no place; originally his aim was 
solely to provide seminaries for his own Order. The 
novices and junior members of the Order had a common 
dwelling-place in a university city; thence they went to 
attend the public lectures. Soon the strength of the Order 
increased so greatly that he was able to think of allowing 
its offshoots in the colleges to develop their own educa- 
tional capacities. Finally, at the request of the founders 
and benefactors, permission was given to receive extern 
pupils for instruction, or also to take over middle and high 
schools which were almost exclusively intended for the 
tuition of externs.* 

On these lines then even at an early period the educa- 
tional rules of the Constitutions were moving. They 
embraced the whole system of teaching from the alphabet 
to the curriculum of the university.^ In the front rank of 
educational functions stood the exegesis of Holy Scrip- 
ture and the scholastic theology of St. Thomas Aquinas. 
The sentences of Peter Lombard were at the same time 
set down for reading. If the exigencies of the time 
required it, some other theological text-book might be 
introduced with the consent of the General and on the 
advice of men of ripe experience ; canon law was also 
taught with the exception of such portions as concerned the 
practice of legal tribunals ;^ civil law and medicine might 

^ Ferd. Tournier, Mons. Guillaume du Prat au Concile de Trente : 
Etudes, XCVIII. (1904), 477-484. 

2 These are published in Latin and German by G. M. Pachtler, 
S.J., in the Mon. Germ, paed., II. : Ratio studiorum et Institutiones 
scolasticae Societatis Jesu, I., Berlin, 1887, 8-69. 

2 That is the meaning of the words "sin entrar en la parte de 
C^nones que sirve para el foro contencioso" : "non attingendo tamen 
eum partem Canonum, quae foro contentioso inservit" (P. 4, c. 12, 
n. 1). Gothein's explanation is incorrect : "that Ignatius also though; 


be taken up by extern pupils ; in philosophy Aristotle was 
master. The collegiate course consisted of five classes : 
three for grammar, followed by humanity and rhetoric. 
Together with Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, Arabic, the 
Indian and other languages might be studied where this 
would be of use ; mathematics and history were not to 
be omitted, and instruction in reading and writing was a 
labour of love which the Order in no way excluded.^ To 
pass Master in the liberal arts three years and a half 
must be given to philosophy ; for the doctor's degree in 
theology it was required that the customary four years of 
study should be supplemented by another two. Promo- 
tions were free of charge, and entertainments on taking the 
doctor's degree forbidden on account of the expense.^ 

Higher value was attached to the moral discipline of 
youth. The works of classical authors, therefore, were 
purged of unseemly passages and expressions. A book 
unobjectionable in itself but by an author of bad repute 
was not to be used as a school-book, otherwise an attraction 
might be felt towards the author and admiration for what 
he says rightly be transferred to those things which he 
asserts wrongly. Where laziness and bad habits do not 
give way to persuasion bodily punishment must ensue ; 
but the chastisement must never be given by a fellow- 
member of the Order. All scholars, even the University 
students, ought to go to confession at least once a month ; 
they must also attend Mass daily, hear a sermon every 
Sunday, go once a week to the explanation of the Catechism, 
and also listen once a week to an edifying discourse in Latin 
which one of the scholars shall be appointed to deliver. 

that many parts of the canon law were of no use save for fostering a 
spirit of litigation '' (p. 441). 

1 Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 12, n. i, 2, 4 A, B, C ; c. 14, n. i, 3 B, C. 

« Ibid., P. 4, c. IS, n. 2, 3,4 F. 


The teachers, in and out of hours of instruction, shall 
avail themselves of every opportunity to stimulate in their 
pupils a love of God's service and of virtue.^ For scholars 
belonging to the Society itself a special course of study 
must be drawn up with the General's approval ; in this 
attention must be given to the requirements of time and 
place. Besides, each college is to have its own regulations 
going more fully into details.^ In this part of the Con- 
stitutions, as in all the rest, to the rules are often added the 
words " as far as this is possible." The " when " and " how " 
are constantly committed to the wise discretion of the 
Superior.^ It is evident that the educational rules of the 
Constitutions were copied from those obtaining in Paris, 
where Ignatius and his first comrades had studied.* 

The working of the Society must, despite its complexity 
and great local expansion, maintain its characteristic of 
unity. Of service for this was the correlated distribution of 
the Society into a varied membership of novices, scholastics, 
lay brothers, ecclesiastical coadjutors, and professed, with 
their hierarchical order and dependence, as well as the 
combination of individual houses into provinces and of 
these into assistances under one common head. The 
functions of obedience and command ascend in an ordered 
series of succession from the subordinates upwards through 
the immediate, mediate, and highest authorities, and vice 
versa from the latter downwards. The Provincial must 
make frequent visitation of the houses.^ 

^ Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 5 E ; c. 7, n. 2 ; c. 14, n. 2 A ; c. 16, n. 1-5. 

2 Ibid.^ P. 4, c. 7, n. 2 ; c. 13 A. 

3 Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. IS, 18, 21 B, C, F, I, R ; c. 2, n. i, 5 E, G ; P. 4, 
c. 4 A ; c. 6 A ; c. IS C-F ; P. 6, c. 2 M ; c. 3 A. 

* More fully in B. DUHR, S.J., Die Studienordnung der Gesell- 
schaft Jesu : Bibl. der kathol. Padagogik, IX., Freiburg i. Br., 1896, 

' Constitutiones, P. 8, c. I, n. 4 J. 


The secret par excellence of the powerful solidarity of 
the Jesuit Order lies in the supreme authority of the 
General. Chosen by the general assemblage of the Order, 
he alone among all the officers holds his office for life; he 
it is who has power to admit all and to dismiss all, who 
nominates and removes not only the provincials but also 
all rectors of the novitiates and the colleges,^ who dispenses 
spiritual powers and graces, limits them and recalls them, 
who convenes and presides over the general assemblies of 
the Order. To him every third year each province of the 
Order must send a confidential member to report to him 
on the condition of the province. In difficult affairs indeed 
the General must attend to the counsel of the Assistants, 
about four in number, given him as assessors by the 
general assembly, but their counsel has not binding 
power.2 Yet on the other hand again, this supreme 
authority in the Order is moderated not only by the divine 
and ecclesiastical commandments but also by the Constitu- 
tions of the Society itself; their alteration belongs only to 
the General Congregation of the Order. This highest 
tribunal is composed of the General, his Assistants, the 
Provincials, and each couple of professed chosen in each 
province by a Provincial Congregation consisting of the 
Provincial, the Rectors, and the rest of the professed. The 
General Congregation also alone has the right to dissolve 
a college. The General is recommended to give a wide 
scope for the activity of his subordinate officers. It is the 
duty of his Assistants to watch over his personal tasks; 

* At first Ignatius allowed or commanded, from time to time, the 
members of a house to elect their own Superior— such was the case in 
Gandia (letter to them, dat. Rome, July 29, 1547 ; Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 
I., 560). 

2 Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 10, n. 3 ; c. 17, n. I ; P. 8, C. 2 B. ; P. 9, 
c. I, n. I A ; c. 3, n. 1-17 ; c. 6, n. 10, n. 


they must take care that he does not injure his health 
through too severe a manner of life or through excess of 
exertion. Further, the Order sets beside him an Admonitor, 
who, whether he be likewise chosen by the General as his 
confessor or not, has in case of necessity to call his atten- 
tion to faults in his behaviour or in the conduct of his 
office. It is also the Assistants' duty to take care that a 
General who is incapable of work or is unworthy of his 
place should be provided with a coadjutor or a successor.^ 

A second unifying tie in the Order is brotherly love. 
A common system of life, uniformity of doctrine in 
sermons, lectures and writings, mutual discussion in 
Provincial and General assemblies bind their hearts 
together. " In their ceremonies" the Society "shall, so far 
as it is practicable in different localities, follow the Roman 
usage, as this is the more general and is in a more particular 
way adopted by the Apostolic See." The of^cers shall in 
their commands show good-will, modesty, and charity, so 
that their rule shall be more by love than by fear. The 
Provincials and Rectors must always have certain members 
of the Order marked out for them with whom in matters of 
importance they can consult even if the decision rests 
entirely in their own hands.^ 

Ignatius showed exceptional skill in turning corre- 
spondence into an instrument wherewith to direct the Order 
and cement its unity. Frequently, at appointed times, the 
General must receive reports from the Provincials and 
Rectors, the Provincials from the Rectors, and the latter 
from those whose work lies outside the houses, to all of 
whom, in return, replies and instructions must be sent. 

^ Constitutiones, P. 4, c. 2, n. 3 ; c. 10, n. 2 ; P. 8, c. 2, n. 2 ; c. 4, 
n. I ; P. 9, c. 4, n. 1-7 ; c. 5, n. 3 ; c. 6, n. 2 ; P. 10, n. 8. 

2 Ibid., P. 3, c. I, n. 18 ; P. 4, c. 8, n. 2 ; P. 8, c. i, n. 8 G j P. 9, 
c. 6, n. 14. 


Moreover, in each house of the Order an account must be 
given of anything consolatory or edifying that has been 
reported from the rest. To serve this purpose, at appointed 
times letters are set in circulation. Thus mutual re- 
membrance is maintained, the different fields of labour 
are passed in review, lessons are learned from the ex- 
periences of others, comfort is afforded in moments of 
misfortune, and the spur applied to a noble emulation.^ 

The originality of the founder of the Society of Jesus 
was displayed not merely in his choice of new weapons 
but in his rejection of old methods of warfare. Nothing 
was further from his thought than a desire to subjugate the 
world ; his only purpose was to supply the Papacy with a 
band of auxiliary troops always ready to march and easy 
to handle in the defence and extension of the Church. 
For this reason the men of the Order were never to be 
hampered by the episcopal staff or tied down to one fixed 
spot by the regular direction of women's souls. After 
giving in the Constitutions solid guarantees for the inner 
life of the individual members, Ignatius felt that, for the 
sake of the tasks set before them, many external means of 
protection, which for centuries had been of the greatest 
blessing and service to the religious orders, must be cast 
aside. Among them was the special dress of the orders. 
To the enemies of the Church the monk's garment was 
an abomination ; nor was this all : stained by the immoral 
and renegade, the habit even in many Catholic districts was 
more likely to find doors and hearts closed against it than 
opened to receive it. Ignatius ruled that his followers 
should wear the dress of the countries in which they were 
living; at the same time they were always to be mindful 
of respectability and poverty.^ Also in their keep and 

* Constitutiones, P. 8, c. i, n. 9 L, M. 

* Ibid.^ P. 6, c. 2, n. 15. 


the Other external observances of life they were to con- 
form to local customs without being bound by a general 
rule to observe special fasts and other acts of penance ; in 
the practice of the latter they were rather to be guided 
each one by the direction of their confessor or superior.'- 

In the same spirit Ignatius also took another bold step 
which the founders of the Theatine Order had not yet 
ventured upon, and for which ten years after his death he 
was still unforgiven by many pious and learned men. 
Strongly attracted as he was personally to the solemn 
observance of the Church prayers in choir,^ he yet released 
his Order entirely from this practice in order that the work 
of preaching, hearing confessions, and giving instruction 
might meet with no impediment ; those who wish to seek 
edification in prayer in choir could find, he said, churches 
enough wherein to satisfy their wishes.^ 

It would seem that the founder of the Society of Jesus 
in all these regulations had before his eyes the saying of 
St. Thomas Aquinas : " Strictness in external things is 
not the main point in the life of an Order. . . . That 
Order does not stand highest which exceeds others in 
strictness in externals, but which in the external ordering 
of its life adapts itself most reasonably to the special 
object for which it exists."^ A computation has been 
made of the number of times in which in his Constitutions 
Ignatius makes use of the phrases "to the greater glory 
of God," "to the greater service of God," and such and 

* Constitutiones, P. 3, c. I, n. 15 ; P. 6, c. 2, n. 16 ; c. 3, n. i. 

2 Cf. RlBADENEIRA, De actis, etc., n. 29 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., 

I., 348). 
2 Constitutiones, P. 6, c. 3, n. 4. 

* S. theol., 2, 2, q. 188, a. 6 ad 3. P. Heinr. Denifle, O.P., has 
some excelleiit remarks on the Jesuit system in his work : Luther 
und Luthertum in der ersten Entwicklung, I,, Mainz, 1904, 175-179- 


similar expressions are found to occur in more than two 
hundred and fifty places.^ The Constitutions are the 
shafts of h'ght which irradiated from his soul, and his 
soul was filled with love — the love of God and of his 
neighbour. If in his Exercises Ignatius revealed himself 
as a great director of souls, in his Constitutions he appears 
as a great lawgiver to his Order.^ 

A great opportunity for vindicating this zeal for God's 
glory occurred to the Order at the end of 1545, when the 
Council of Trent was opened. Ignatius had placed Le 
Jay at the disposal of the Bishop of Augsburg, Cardinal 
Otto von Truchsess, who appointed him his procurator 
at Trent in December 1545. Le Jay had his seat by 
the Bishop's side, although only with a consultative 
voice.^ He was one of the two to whom, on the 23rd of 
February 1546, the first draft of the decree on the Holy 
Scriptures and tradition was entrusted.* With Cardinal 
Cristoforo Madruzzo, Prince-Bishop of Trent, he stood 
on a footing of great confidence.^ But the Pope himself 
also wished to send some Jesuits to Trent. Ignatius had 

* Acta Sanctorum, Julii, VII., n. 677. 

2 Victor Naumann (Pilatus) says: "The constitution of the 
Society is a masterpiece of art which does high honour to its inven- 
tor" (Dor Jesuitismus, Regensburg, 1905, 95). Cf. also Buss, I,, 


3 The mandate (dated Dillingen, Dec. i, 1545) whereby provost 
Andreas Rem von Kotz and Claude Le Jay were appointed procurators 
is given by EhSES (Cone. Trid., IV., i, 440-442 ; cf. ibid., 540). Rem 
remained only a short time in Trent. 

* Notes of the promoter of the Council, Ercole Severoli, and 
diaries of the secretary of the Council, Angelo Massarelli, in Merkle, 
Cone. Trid., I., i., 3, 33, 88, 93, 105, 352, 430, 592. Cf. also Mon. 
Ignat., Sen I., I., 302. 

^ So Canisius in his autograph notes in Ribadeneira'S Life of the 
saint, Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., I., 719. 


to select them ; he named Faber, Laynez, and Salmeron.'^ 
Faber, however, died soon after at Rome. From the 
instructions which the General gave them for their conduct 
at Trent we see that the care of souls was to be a primary 
consideration. In preaching they were to avoid exposition 
of the doctrines on which the Protestants were at variance 
with the Catholics ; their sermons and instructions were 
to end with a prayer for the Council. In speaking they 
were to be very cautious and unassuming.^ 

From the presidents of the assembly, the Cardinal-Legates 
del Monte and Cervini, Laynez and Salmeron met with a 
very cordial greeting — their reception by the bishops was 
not so warm ; the Spanish prelates in particular were 
almost ashamed of the youth and shabby clothes of their 
fellow-countrymen.^ The latter made haste to visit the 
poor, who had been gathered together in a house outside 
the city. On alternate days Laynez, Salmeron, and Le 
Jay went thither and said Mass, expounded the cardinal 
doctrines of the Faith, and administered the Sacraments.* 
" With great matters," they wrote conjointly to Ignatius 
on the 4th of June 1546, "we do not mix ourselves up 
beyond what is imposed upon us by our duties." ^ They 
had no respite from work; all bishops and divines at 
Trent were forbidden to preach in public ; at the request, 
however, of some of the Fathers, Laynez was ordered by 
the Cardinal-Legates to occupy the pulpit, and he preached 
to great congregations on Sundays and feast-days in 

' Ignatius to Francis Borgia, dat. Rome, April 23, 1546; Men. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 381. 

2 The reference in Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 386-389. 

3 Orlandinus, 1. 6, n. 21, 23. 

* POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 128. Cf. note i, loc. cit., 388, 389, 
^ Epistolae P. Alphonsi Salmeronis, Societatis Jesu ex autographis 

vel originalibus exemplis potissimum depromptae, a Patribus ejusdem 

Societatis nunc prinium editae, I., Matriti, 1906, it. 


S. Maria Maggiore^ Before this the Legates had already 
bidden him and Salmeron take part^ in the gatherings of 
theologians, who were not Fathers of the Council — the so- 
called lesser theologians, — in which divines of the first 
rank from different countries discussed before Cardinals 
and bishops the burning questions of the hour. Here 
Laynez and Salmeron dealt with the question of justi- 
fication with such soundness and learning that many 
members of the Council asked them for copies of these 
disquisitions.^ Laynez refuted Seripando's view of "im- 
puted justice" in a treatise which threw light on the 
whole question.* 

Peter Canisius, who was appointed in February 1547 
by Cardinal Truchsess as an assistant theologian to Le 
Jay, wrote from Trent to Rome: "Other theologians 
have barely an hour to speak in ; but Laynez was 
allowed by the Cardinal-President to speak for three 
hours and even longer."^ The Bishop of Foligno declared 
a year later that none had expressed themselves at Trent 
so clearly and intelligibly as Laynez and Salmeron.^ 
From justification the discussion passed to the Sacraments; 

* Ignatius to Torres, dat. Rome, Oct. 9, 1546 (Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., 
!•) 435) ; POLANCUS, I., n. 131 ; Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 16. 

* Laynez and companions to Ignatius, dat. Trent, June 4, 1546 
(Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 15, 16). 

2 Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Trent, July 3, 1546 (Epistolae P. Pasch. 
Broeti, 310 seq.) ; cf. the diaries of Massarelli in Merkle, I., 459, 461, 
463, 580, 605, 609, 610, 615. 

* Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 11, n. 9, The treatise is given by 
Hartm. Grisar, S.J. : Jacobi Lainez Disputationes Tridentinae, II., 
Oeniponte, 1886, 153-192. Theiner's edition is faulty. 

fi Braunsberger, I., 245. 

8 Silvestro Landini to Ignatius, dat. Foligno, Dec. 1548 (Litterae 
quadrimestres, I., Matriti, 1894, 124); cf. also Ignatius to Rodriguez, 
dat. Rome, Aug. 19, 1546 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., I., 413). 


Laynez and Salmeron were instructed by the Legates to 
summarize the errors of the Protestants and the contrary 
statements of Fathers and Councils. Cardinal Cervini 
presented this work to the Fathers as a basis for the 
negotiations.^ Salmeron, in the middle of July 1546, in 
a letter meant only for the General himself, stated: "The 
doctrine of some of the theologians is bad ; Cardinal 
Cervini therefore takes care that in the meetings of 
theologians one of us is among the first speakers and 
explains the subject ; the other is kept in reserve for the 
end ; it is his special business to refute the less correct 
opinions that have been expressed. Almost all the 
bishops, Italian, Spanish, and French, are on our side ; 
and among the Spaniards those who at first were most 
against us now speak openly in our praise, invite us to 
their tables, and impart to us what they intend to say in 
the congregations. . . . Many learned prelates come to us 
before the congregations to consult us about their votes. 
Others who are better versed in other subjects than 
theology receive our instruction willingly and thoroughly. 
Cardinal Cervini gives us his entire confidence."^ 

At the beginning of 1547 Ignatius, at the request of 
the Duchess of Tuscany, wished to send Laynez to 
Florence ; but Cardinal Cervini declared that he was 
indispensable, and Bishop Archinto, the Vicar of Paul III., 
wrote to the General that his sons could not do more good 
at any place in the world than at Trent.^ When in Marcl\ 

^ Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., ed. Merkle, I., 459,604,605; Le 
Jay to Ignatius, dat. Trent, Jan. 30, 1 547 (Epistolae P. Pasch. Broeti, 
333); POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 177. 

2 Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 26, 27 ; c/. also Orlandinus, 
I. 6, n. 25, and Astrain, I., 526, 527. 

2 Bartoli, Istoria della Comp. 1' Italia, 1. 2, c. 4 (Opere V., Torino, 
1825, 35-38). C/. Tacchi Venturi in Civ. Catt., Sen XVIII.. vi 
(1899), 156-166. 

VOL. XII. 6 


1547 the transference of the Council to Bologna was 
decided on, Laynez and Salmeron were also sent there 
by the Legates. Le Jay and Canisius wrote repeatedly 
to Cardinal Truchsess, to whom the removal was highly 
displeasing, and asked for instructions. As the reply 
was long in coming, they betook themselves to Bologna 
as Ignatius had ordered. At last Le Jay received from 
Truchsess the hint not to appear as his procurator in 
Bologna: he was now a simple theologian.^ Although 
the assembly at Bologna was, owing to the Emperor's 
opposition, only a troublesome waste of time, the Jesuits 
stayed there a considerable time. Laynez spoke for 
three consecutive hours on the sacrament of penance ; 
Canisius also sometimes spoke. The secretary of the 
Council, Massarelli, wrote in his diary on the 15th of May 
1547: "This afternoon I was with Messers Claudius, Jacobus, 
and Alphonsus, of the Society of Jesus, and showed them 
the censures and opinions on the Canons on the Eucharist; 
we conversed for four hours over these opinions. I then 
drew up my report of this for my very honourable 
masters." Salmeron in November 1547 was still working 
for the Council.^ 

These exertions were also of advantage to the Society. 
Bishop Guillaume du Prat of Clermont came to the con- 
viction that the Jesuits would be of service to the Church 

^ "Alias Tridenti procurator R™ Otthonis cardinalis Augustensis" 
(Massarelli on the assembly of theologians of May 6, 1547 : 
Diarium, IV., ed. Merkle, I., 649 ; cf. also ibid., 670) ; Letter from 
Truchsess to Le Jay, dat. Dillingen, April 18, 1547 (Epistolae Mixtae, 
I-, 356, 357) ; POLANCUS, n. 177. 

2 Massarelli, Diarium, IV., loc. cit, 644-649, 652, 660, 671-674, 679, 
683 ; Braunsberger, I., 684, 685 ; Salmeron to Ignatius, dat. Bologna, 
Nov. 26, 1547 (Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 59) ; Orlandinus, 1. 7, 
n. 24. Cf. also GUIS. BOERO, S.J., Vito del Servo di Die P. Giacomo 
Lainez, Firenze, 1880, 70-75. 


of France, and resolved to found two colleges for them, one 
in Paris, the other in Billom. Many other bishops also 
expressed a wish to have some Jesuits in their sees. The 
Bishop of Badajoz sent very favourable reports to the 
Spanish court of Laynez and his colleagues at Trent. He 
also sent Salmeron's printed sermon to the council of the 
Inquisition as the best that had been delivered on the 
Council. The Inquisitors were much pleased with it. 
" Thus," wrote the Provincial Araoz from Madrid to Rome, 
"others have done more for us by their speeches than we 
have ourselves with all the sweat of our brows in Spain." ^ 

Venice was the first city, with the exception of Rome, 
in which the Jesuits found a foothold. The Venetian 
patrician Andrea Lippomano offered the young members 
sent to study at Padua by Ignatius a residence in the 
priory of the Teutonic Order belonging to him there ; he 
soon went a step further and without any solicitation 
declared himself ready, with the Pope's permission, to 
assign this benefice entirely to the Society. Paul III. 
ordered an investigation of the circumstances to be made, 
and then as supreme administrator of the property of the 
Church ordained that the priorate of Padua should be set 
apart for the maintenance of two houses of students of the 
Society of Jesus, one to be established in Padua and 
another in Venice.^ Philip, the Spanish heir-apparent, 
wrote to the Doge that the priorate might certainly be 

1 Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Trent, May 10, 1546 (Epistolae P. Pasch. 
Broeti, 307-309); Salmeron to Ignatius, dat. Trent, Sept. 30, 1546 
(Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 29) ; Araoz to Ignatius, dat. April 24, 
1547 (Epistolae Mixtae, I., 359); Orlandinus, 1. 6, n. 30; Som- 

MERVOGEL, VII., 478, 479. 

2 Ferron, S.J., to Rodriguez, dat. Rome, Nov. 21, 1545 (Mon. Ignat, 
Ser. I., I., 330). Report on the Society of Jesus, 1547, sent from Italy 
to the court of Charles V. (Const. Soc. Jesu lat. at hisp., 347, 348); 
POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 37, 51, 86. 


given to the Jesuits and every favour be generally shown 
to them, as he knew them to be men of zealous, learned, 
and edifying conversation.^ When the vote was afterwards 
taken in the Senate there was also a very large majority 
in their favour.^ 

In compliance with their desire Laynez was sent to the 
Venetians by Paul III., and together with other duties he 
gave lectures thrice a week on St. John's Gospel. Cardinal 
Cervini succeeded in securing for a while the services of 
Pascal Broet for his native place, Montepulciano. In 
Verona, Salmeron, sent thither by Ignatius on the invitation 
of the learned and pious Bishop Luigi Lippomano, preached 
on Sundays to the people on the Epistle to the Romans. 
To another very learned bishop, the Dominican, Ambrogio 
Catarino, Bobadilla was given for his see of Minori.^ 

In Faenza, Lutheran teaching had been disseminated by 
the apostate General of the Capuchins, Ochino ; moreover, 
in the city and throughout the whole Romagna many 
vendettas existed, some of which had been handed down 
for more than a century ; assassinations constantly ensued. 
There Broet appeared and in seven schools of the city gave 
Christian instruction ; his sermons produced such an effect 
that on one occasion more than a hundred persons were at 
the same time solemnly reconciled. He also founded the 
Compagnia della Carita for the purpose of seeking out the 
sick poor, moving them to confess and receive communion, 
and providing for their nourishment and medical aid.^ 

* Epistolae Mixtae, I., 570, 571. 

2 RiBADENEiRA, De actis, etc., n. 52. Cf. K. SCHELLHASS in Quellen 
und Forschungen VII., 91-120. The later attempts of the German 
Order to cancel the transfer were ineffectual. 

8 POLANCUS, 43, 50, 235, 238, 391, 393. 

* Broet to Francis Xavier, dat. Faenza, March i, 1545, and to 
,'natius, dat. Faenza, Nov. i, 1545 (Epistolae P. Pasch. Broeti, 34-37); 
OLANCUS, n. 910, 


Belluno underwent a like transformation. Attendance 
upon sermons had dropped out of practice ; un-Catholic 
views on confession, purgatory, and the saints were diffused. 
In 1549 Bishop Giulio Contarini made an arrangement with 
Ignatius that Salmeron should come to Belluno, and in that 
year the Sacraments were frequented by nearly a thousand 
more persons than in the year before ; Lutheran books, 
translated into Italian, were cast into the fire; the city 
made public declaration that Salmeron had wrought a new 
birth and total renovation.^ 

The first beginnings of the Order in Modcna were less 
fortunate. The academy in that city had a reputation of 
years' standing as a centre of error and free thought. As 
early as 1536 and 1539 Paul III. had taken serious steps to 
remedy the evil. In 1 543 the bishop of the city, the noble, 
peace-loving Cardinal Morone, invited Salmeron to fill the 
pulpit of the Cathedral. He began a course of sermons ; 
the members of the academy soon began to accuse him 
of caustic and acrimonious allusions. Morone having 
returned home in the meantime heard one of the sermons 
himself. He received the impression that in it the good 
works had been rated too highly, and made representations 
to Salmeron on the subject. The quick-tempered Spaniard 
made a reply which was somewhat disrespectful; there- 
upon the Cardinal, as he expressed himself later on, got rid 
of his man upon the spot.^ When, fourteen years after- 
wards, Morone was imprisoned in St. Angelo by Paul IV. 
on suspicion of heresy, this brush with Salmeron formed 

' Salmeron to Ignatius, dat. Venice, April 27, 1549 (Epistolae P. A. 
Salmeronis, I., 74-77) ; Peter Schorich, S.J., to Leonhard Kessel, dat, 
Rome, May 14, 1549 (Hansen, 152, 153) ; Polancus, n. 429, 430, 

2 Polancus, n. 50, 66 ; Salmeron to Ignatius, dat. Lologna, Sept 24, 
1547 (Epistolae P. A. Salmeronis, I., 52, 53); Cantu, Eretici, Il.i 
172, and specially Tacchi VentURI, I., 533 seqq. 


one of the points of the indictment. The magnanimous 
Cardinal, however, was not diverted by this misadventure 
from his leaning towards the Jesuits; their college at 
Modena was the outcome of his insistence.^ 

One of the great supporters of the innovators in religion 
was Renee, Duchess of Ferrara, wife of Duke Ercole II., a 
French princess deeply implicated in Calvinistic teaching. 
Her husband's confessor, the archd . xcon Guido Guidoni 
of Modena, therefore made use of a favourable hour to 
warn the former that he, who had so many counsellors at 
his disposal for the government of his temporal affairs, 
should at least have the assistance of one man to be his 
exhorter and helper in the things that concerned his 
salvation. Ercole assented, and ordered the Pope to be 
asked to send to him Le Jay, whom Ignatius instructed, 
while in Ferrara, to look upon the Duke as his true and 
only superior. Le Jay came and took up his abode in the 
hospital ; the Duke, in whom Ignatius was deceived, 
troubled himself, however, very little about him. It was 
reported that Ercole had said that he did not wish to have 
anything to do with Theatines, as he had no wish to be 
called one himself.^ Le Jay, at the Pope's orders, went in 
1549 to Germany. 

The favourable prospects of the erection of a college in 
Florence were destroyed in 1547 by the young Polanco. 
The General had commissioned him to carry spiritual 
aid to the people of Florence under the direction of 

1 Orlandinus, 1. 12, n. 17. Morone in 1563, after his appointment 
as first President of the Council of Trent, declared to the General, 
Laynez, that he was ready to shed his blood for the Society (Brauns- 
BERGER, IV., 978). 

2 Ignatius to Le Jay, dat. Rome, 1547, beginning of August (Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., I., 569) ; Le Jay to Ignatius, daL Ferrara, 1547, summer 
or autumn (Epistolae P. Pasch., Broeti, 336-338 j cf. ibid., 394, 395) ; 
TuI-ANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 182. 


the Duke and the Archbishop of that city ; he, however, 
was carried away by such excess of zeal that he attempted 
to enforce written advice on the Duke Cosimo and the 
Duchess Eleanora, instructing them how to reform their 
life and government; this gave grievous offence at 
court. Ignatius gave him severe reproof: "Such a 
course," he wrote, " can only then be undertaken when 
the sympathy, confidence, and esteem of such high rulers 
has been secured"; Polanco must now try and remove 
the soreness he had caused by services to the sick in the 
hospitals and similar exhibitions of a humble spirit.^ 
Laynez indeed appeared, at the wish of the Duchess, in 
1548, and on the Sundays in Lent preached to concourses 
of 8000 to 9000 persons in the Duomo ; but it was not 
until 1 55 1 that the college was able to make a beginning.^ 
The Society had to face an actual outburst of storm in 
Parma, where the opposition was led by a member of a 
religious order. The principal cause of offence was the 
frequency of communion introduced by the missionaries; 
in particular much comment was passed on the conduct of 
Giulia Zerbini, a woman of high position and great piety, who 
not only practised the Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius herself, 
but gave them to friends of her own sex. She received 
communion during a sickness every day and, it was said, on 
those days on which she received the Lord's Body she took 
no other food. The judicial investigation instituted by the 

* Attempts have been made recently to show from this circumstanee 
that Ignatius had lax notions of the duties of a Court confessor 
(Druffel, Ignatius von Loyola, 17, 18, 32 ; Gothein, 340). On the 
other hand, see reply of W. Kreiten : " If Ignatius displayed laxity on 
this occasion, then laxity must be a characteristic of reason itself" 
(Stimmen aus Maria Laach, XLIX. [1895], 543). 

2 PoLANcus, n. 233; Orlandinus, I., II, n. 11-24; Ed. Fueter, 
Das erste Auftreten der Jesuiten in Florenz : Zeitschrift fiir Kirchen- 
geschichte, XXVIII. (1907), 432-453. 


Bishop of Parma, Cardinal Guido Ascanio Sforza, led on the 
30th of December 1 543 to a complete acquittal of the Jesuits.^ 

In the Jesuit, Silvestro Landini, Italy then possessed a 
missionary of the first rank. A priest of Casola wrote of 
him to Ignatius : " When he, accompanied by five or six 
ecclesiastics to whom he had given the Exercises, went 
through the country, the people in the fields laid down 
implements of work, left their oxen, and came running up 
to them, sometimes ten, twenty, thirty at a time, begging 
them to hear their confessions." The town of Correggio 
had for more than twenty years been rent by feuds, two 
parties, a French and an Italian, were opposed ; on one 
occasion, within a short time five-and-forty men were slain, 
nothing was spoken of but murder and revenge, and men 
even came to church carrying weapons. Landini by his 
preaching made an entire change ; arms were flung away, 
and all — women, children, the aged — exclaimed, "Peace, 
peace." With sobs and entreaties for forgiveness they fell 
into one another's arms ; some hundred went at the same 
time to the Sacraments.^ 

From Castiglione in the Lunigiana the magistrate 
Baldassare Turiano wrote to Ignatius on the 27th of 
November 1547 begging that "Padre Silvestro" might 
not be sent elsewhere. " He makes peace between relatives, 
between neighbours, between communities; he induces run- 
away monks to return to their convent; he stirs men up to 
give means of subsistence to convents and to the poor ; 
he procures rules against profane swearing and for the 
reverent observance of Sunday ; he preaches in churches 
and public places, explains the Catechism, exhorts men to 
enter the religious life ; he fasts daily, his food is a coarse 

* Epistolae Mixtae, I., 584 ; Orlandinus, 1. 2, n. 76. 
' Reports from Casola and Correggio to Ignatius of 1549 (Litterae 
quadrimestres, I., 161-163, 178-180). 


bread of millet seed, his drink a little water. Great and 
small model their lives on his ; even if he were not to 
preach, his example alone would be a constant sermon." 
Six months later Raffaello Augustini reports from 
Fivizzano : " Padre Landini has been with us for about 
three weeks. He imitates the Apostles and other saints 
of the primitive church, being ever occupied in prayer, 
preaching, penance, and works of charity. He is making 
great efforts to banish hence the plague of Lutheranism, 
which has forced its way from Lucca into the diocese of 
Luni." After some months' work in Foligno, the Bishop of 
the see, the Benedictine, Isidoro Chieri, gave his testimony 
in the words, " We thought that an angel from heaven and 
not a human being was dwelling among us."^ Also in 
Bologna, Brescia, Naples, Pisa, Pistoja, Reggio, and other 
cities Jesuit missionaries were welcomed. They often tried 
to give some perpetuity to their work by forming confra- 
ternities of the Blessed Sacrament, associations of women 
for the protection of penitents of their own sex, and similar 

The first Jesuit to set foot in Sicily was a native of the 
Netherlands, Jacob Lhoost ; he had been sent by Cardinal 
Rodolfo Pio to his diocese of Girgenti. Laynez, at the 
bidding of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, brought reforms 
into the Archdiocese of Monreale; in the cathedral he 
delivered lectures on the Book of Ecclesiastes. Jeronimo 
Domenech came in May 1547 to the capital Palermo ; he 
became confessor to the viceroy Juan de Vega and his 

* Epistolae Mixtae, I., 445, 446, 497, 498 ; Litterae quadrimestres, I., 
156. Cf. also Bartoli, S.J., Degli uomini e de' fatti della Compagnia 
di Gesu : Opera postuma, I., Torino, 1847, 196-217. 

2 The Jesuits, like Paul III., were instrumental in spreading through- 
out Italy the confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament {cf. Tacchi 
VentURI, I., 194 seqq). 


wife, restored order to a convent of female penitents which 
had fallen into the most neglected condition, worked hard 
/or the erection of orphanages for boys and girls, and had a 
catechism printed for the schools of the island. The 
Bishop of Patti, Sebastiano de Aragon, Inquisitor for 
Sicily and one of the foremost men in the kingdom, went 
through the Spiritual Exercises, together with his vicar and 
chaplains. At the request of the viceroy, Ignatius in 
1549 procured a brief from Paul III. ordering the reforma- 
tion of the Sicilian convents of nuns. In the same year a 
college of the Society was opened in Palermo.^ 

A year earlier Palermo's mercantile rival, the rich city of 
Messina, had received a similar institution in answer to 
requests addressed to Paul III. and to Ignatius. It was the 
fii^t of the Order which from its beginning and primarily 
was set apart for the education of extern scholars. The 
General wished to make of it a typical specimen. His 
choice of the first teachers was characteristic ; they included 
a Spaniard, an Italian, a German, a Frenchman, and a 
Savoyard ; before they left Rome they were put through 
the test of giving instructions before him. He then sent 
the ten, who had been selected for Messina, to the Pope to 
ask his blessing; their spokesman was Peter Canisius. 
The Pope gave an extempore address which lasted half an 
hour, full of affection for Sicily and the Society of Jesus. 
Jeronimo Nadal, the first rector, gradually modelled the 
college on the plan of Paris, where he had himself studied.^ 

* BraUNSBERGER, I., 193, 198 ; Domenech to Ignatius, dat. 
Palermo, 1547, July 4, and i548(Litterae quadrimestres, I., 47-53, 131); 
Nadal to Ignatius, dat. Messina, July i549(Epist. P. H. Nadal, I., 67) ; 
PoLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 193-200, 242, 373, 379; Orlandinus, L 7, 
n. 19 ; 1. 9, n. 27. 

2 Cf. Emman. Aguilera, S.J., Provinciae Siculae Societatis Jesu 
ortus et res gestae ab a. 1546 ad a. 161 1, Panormi, 1737, 7-13. 


In the autumn of the year 1548 a new scheme of studies 
was extended throughout Sicily, and also in Calabria. 
The scholars showed great diligence ; as an efficient 
means of moral discipline frequent confession proved its 
influence among them. Messina was so delighted with 
the new school that already in 1548 it ventured to apply 
to the Pope for powers to change the collegiate system 
into that of an university. The time for that, however, 
had not yet come, and the hopes which the founder of the 
Order had built on this foundation were not fully realized, 
but the work in Palermo and Messina bore continuous 
fruit. "The whole of Sicily," wrote Canisius, "is in the 
grip of a moral renovation." ^ 

The first among all the disciples of Loyola to enter on 
Spanish ground was one of his relations, Antonio Araoz, 
who had joined the Society in Rome. His arrival was at 
the end of 1539, when he preached in various places with 
success. He himself informed Ignatius how on the Holy 
Cross day of 1540, the pulpit had to be erected for 
him in the open air near Azpeitia ; over 4000 men had 
come to hear him ; many climbed to the roof of the 
church or the branches of trees in order to have a better 
hearing.^ In 1541 Peter Faber came to Spain; in the 

• Canisius to Kessel and Adrian!, dat. Rome, Feb. 8, 1548, and 
Messina, Aug. 12, 1548 (Braunsperger, I., 265, 284) ; Report of the 
Jesuits in Rome to those of Louvain, dat. Rome, March 19, 1548 
(Hansen, 116-118); Polanco to Araoz, dat. Rome, March 27, 1548, 
and Ignatius to Domenech, dat. Rome, April 7, 1548 (Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. I., II., 51, 52, 75) ; Nadal to Ignatius, dat. Messina, May 7, 1549 
(Epist. P. H. Nadal., I., 57) ; Vita P. Cornelii Vishavaei {ibid., IV., 
875) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 231, 243, 244, 339, 350; F. Meyer, 
Die Missionsplane des Ignatius von Loyola: Histor. Zeitschr., CI., 

2 Vergara, dat. July 4, 1540 (Epist. Mixtae, I., 47); cf. Astrain, 
I., 205, 230 seq. 


following year he was in Germany, and in 1544 went from 
there to Portugal, where he met Araoz. Soon, bearing 
with them letters of recommendation from King John HI. 
of Portugal, they both made their way to Valladolid to the 
court of the Spanish heir-apparent, Philip. There they 
found powerful patrons in Cardinal Juan Tavera, in the 
Grand Inquisitor Diego Tavera, and in the Papal nuncio 
Giovanni Poggio, who undertook the maintenance of the 
Fathers.^ On Prince Philip removing his court to Madrid 
Araoz was frequently resident there. He defended 
earnestly the practice of frequent communion, which many 
at that time regarded as unpermissible and stigmatized as 
a Jesuit invention ; he also laboured with success at the 
moral renovation of the convents of women of Catalonia. 
At Philip's request Ignatius, in concert with the Spanish 
ambassador in Rome, had obtained from Paul III. the 
requisite instructions and faculties.^ 

In 1547 Araoz was appointed by Ignatius first Provincial 
of the Society in Spain. Within two years a college 
was started at Valladolid ; the house which was assigned 
to the Fathers was fitted up by the nuncio Poggio at his 
owe expense. Between 1544 and 1546 colleges also arose 
in Valencia, Gandia, Barcelona, and Alcala.^ Hostility, 
however, was not wanting. This was no subject of alarm 
to Ignatius, on the contrary, he felt cause for depression 
when the colleges enjoyed long intervals of peace ; for then 
he begat! to fear that the zeal of the Society might be 

» POLANCUS, I., n. 33, 143, 266 ; Orlandinus, 1. 5, n. 64, 65 ; 

ASTRAIN, I., 235, 242. 

2 Philip to Ignatius, dat. Monzon, Aug. 18, 1547 ; Polanco to Araoz, 
dat. Rome, Oct. 31, 1547 ; Araoz to Polanco, dat. Barcelona, Jan. 12, 
1549 (Epist. Mixtae, I., 395, 396; II., 37, 38; Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., 
I., 612, 613). 

3 POLANCUS, aironicon, I., n. 364 ; AsTRAiN, I., 265-278. 


languishing.^ In Saragossa the Prior of the Dominicans 
did his utmost towards the foundation of a Jesuit college; 
the Viceroy, the Inquisitors, the civic council, and many 
notables were on his side, but the Carmelites, Franciscans, 
and Augustinians joined hands with the local clergy and 
for a time made the execution of the scheme impossible.^ 
The new Archbishop of Toledo and Primate of Spain, 
Juan Martinez Siliceo, was also unfavourable to the Society ; 
he issued orders prohibiting any but parish priests to 
administer communion in his diocese. This ordinance 
was directed against the Jesuits who, it was reported, had 
been spoken of as heretics by the Archbishop.^ 

Salamanca was the centre of the most violent storm 
of opposition to the new Order. Cardinal Francisco de 
Mendoza, Bishop of Coria, had in Rome proposed to the 
General that he should erect a Jesuit college in that city 
of Spain in which the first university had been opened. 
This had taken place in Salamanca in 1548. In the 
learned and wealthy Doctor Alonzo Ramirez de Vergara 
the school had a liberal benefactor.* There an antagonist 
of the new community arose in the person of the 

* Orlandinus, 1. 14, n. 9 ; Dictamina S. Ignatii (Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. IV., I., 478). 

2 Francesco de Rojas, S.J., to Araoz, dat. Saragossa, Aug. 1548 
(Epist. Mixtae, I., 555-557) ; Astrain, I., 441-452. 

2 Francesco de Villanueva, S.J., to Ignatius, dat. Guadalajara, Oct. 
31, 1549 (Epist. Mixtae, II., 302). 

* Vergara wished to join the Society, but was prevented by external 
circumstances all his life long (Polancus, I., n. 463). This has 
recently been adduced erroneously as evidence that he was throughout 
his life a secret member, and has given rise to the curious identifica- 
tion of the class of " Indifferentes " {see supra, p. 62) with a class of 
"Secret Jesuits." No such class exists among the members of the 
Order. For the beginnings of the College at Salamanca, see ASTRAIN. 
I., 298-303. 


Dominican Melchior Cano, since 1546 first professor of 
theology in the University of Salamanca, and a man whose 
brilliant gifts and deep learning had made him the pride of 
Spain. The strange hallucination took possession of him 
that the Jesuits were the forerunners of Antichrist. He 
first gave public utterance to this notion during the Lenten 
sermons of the year 1548. At the close of the same year, 
on the 25th of November, the Jesuit Alvarez had to inform 
Ignatius : " To-day Doctor Cano preached before the whole 
University : one of the curses of Christendom is the short- 
sightedness of those prelates who, in order to please some 
pious souls, give their sanction to new and laxly regulated 
orders; I mean orders whose members go to and fro 
about the streets like other people — an order of loungers, 
I call them ; they are given up to indolence, they take 
good care not to mortify the body, they procure for them- 
selves permission to say their prayers out of the curtailed 
Roman breviary." Fourteen days later Cano was under- 
stood to say, " Signs shall go before the Last Judgment. 
Among them hypocrisies, 'Alumbrado' — revelations, 
exercises, and what now is deemed holy shall then be 
accursed and led down to hell."^ 

Cano did not name the Jesuits, but everbody knew of 
whom he spoke. Fingerswere pointed at them in Salamanca ; 
to hold converse with them was to forfeit reputation. The 
persecuted teachers suffered quietly for a time and waited ; 
they then sought out Cano and privately addressed to him 
explanations and arguments. When this was unavailing 
Ignatius bethought him of a more telling means of defence. 
At his instigation the General of the Order of Preachers, 
Francisco Romeo, sent from Rome in December 1548 a 

- Cartas de S. Ignacio, II., 485-488 ; Epist. Mixtae, I., 491, 492 ; 
Ignatius to J. de Avila and to M. Tones, dat. Jan. 24 and 26, 1549 
(Mon. Ignat, Sen I., II., 319, 320, 331) ; Astraiw, I., 321-333- 


circular letter to all brothers of his Order in which he an- 
nounced " that the Society of Jesus had the approval of the 
Pope, and was doing an extraordinary amount of good by 
its labours and example; he therefore, in virtue of holy 
obedience, forbade any attack, public or private, on the new 
Order, which ought rather to be looked upon as an ally in 
their spiritual warfare and to receive their protection and 
help." ^ Somewhat before this Pope Paul 1 1 1., at the request 
of Cardinal Mendoza, had written already to the Bishops 
of Cuen^a and Salamanca in which he bitterly complained 
that evil men in Salamanca and in some other parts of 
Spain had blackened the Society and its members in 
sermons, lectures, and confidential conversation, thereby 
depriving them of popular confidence and undermining 
their influence for good ; the Pope therefore appointed the 
two bishops protectors of the Order and gave them all the 
necessary powers.^ Cano now held his peace for some time. 
The feeling of enmity towards the Jesuits began to wane 
in Salamanca. To this change of disposition contributed 
especially, together with Estrada's Lent sermons and the 
devotion of his comrade Miguel Torres to those in prison 
and under sentence of death, the Apologia of the Jesuits, 
written by a member of Cano's own Order, the distinguished 
Dominican Juan de Pena. Louis of Granada also, great 
as a master of Spanish style, greater still as a master of 
the Christian life, one of the noblest ornaments of the 
Dominican Order in that century, was a staunch and out- 
spoken friend of the Society. For some time indeed it 
seemed as if another great spiritual teacher, Thomas of 
Villanova, Archbishop of Valencia, were about to take 
his place among the opponents of the Jesuits ; to him, the 
stern Augustinian monk, many things in the new Order 

^ Printed in the Cartas de S. Ignacio, II., 492-494. 
2 Published in the Cartas de S. Ignacio, II., 480-484. 


seemed dangerous and suspicious, but when the saintly 
man was shown how all had been approved at Rome, he 
disquieted himself no longer and became a great benefactor 
of the Order.i John of Avila, the Apostle of Andalusia, 
deplored that old age and illness hindered him from joining 
the Society ; but, he wrote to Ignatius, he wished to do all 
that he could for them ; from the first he had seen in them 
a work of God and a gift of Providence.^ 

Much closer to the Society was yet another saint to be 
drawn. When Ignatius in 1527 was brought prisoner to 
Alcala on a charge of heresy, he was met in the street, 
so tjie. story goes, by the young Marquis Francisco de 
Lombay, eldest son of Duke Juan III. of Gandia,^ mounted 
high on his steed, with a retinue of friends and servants. 
Little did either of the two men dream in what altered 
circumstances they should meet together in the years 
to come. 

Appointed viceroy of Catalonia by Charles V. in 1539, 
Francis Borgia, who was in 1 542 a Tertiary of the Franciscan 
Order, heard through Peter Faber of the Society of Jesus. 
Soon afterwards his father Juan III. died, and Francis suc- 
ceeded to the Dukedom of Gandia. One of the responsi- 
bilities he now felt most strongly was the care for the newly 
converted Moors ; in order to give them religious help he 
founded at Lombay a large Dominican convent. For the 
education of the young Moriscos he wished to found a 
school in the town of Gandia and hand it over to the 
Jesuits; Ignatius, however, urged him to found a special 

» Epist. Mixtae, I., 256-258 ; ASTRAIN, I., 333-339, 657-669. 

^ Ignatius to Avila, dat. Rome, Jan. 24, 1549, and Polanco to 
Villanueva, dat. Rome, Jan. 25, 1549 (Men. Ignat., Sen I., II., 317, 
325) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 465. 

3 Bartoli, Ignazio, 1. I, n. 33 ; P. SUAU, St. FranijOis cle Borgia, 
Paris, 1905, II. 


college. While hitherto these institutions had been reserved 
for young members of the Order only, now for the first time 
admission would be given to Moorish children as well and 
to others from outside. The college was opened in 1 546, 
and Paul III. raised it in the following year to the rank of 
a university. The Duchess did not live to see this, for she 
died on the 27th of March 1546. Thereupon Francis went 
through the Exercises and took a vow to enter the Order.^ 
He could not, however, refuse to take his place by the side 
of Philip on the assembling of the Estates of Aragon in 
1547. The Prince wished also to make him his " Major- 
domo"; but Borgia now resolved to withdraw gradually 
from the world. Ignatius obtained for him the Papal 
permission to take the vows of solemn profession and 
notwithstanding this to administer during three years his 
temporal possessions ; by that time his children would be 
provided for and his foundations completed." 

On the 1st of February 1548 Francis made profession 
at Gandia before a few witnesses ; the documents were 
put on paper in secret characters and sent to Rome.^ 
Borgia continued to dress as a layman and to keep princely 
state. The step that he had taken was not publicly known 
in Spain until 1551.* Six months after his profession 
the General had to shorten by half Francis' periods of 
prayer and to prohibit his macerating sccurgings and 
fastings; "otherwise," wrote Ignatius, "his bodily strength 
will be ruined"; there must be "mens sana in corpore 

' POLANCUS, I., n. 107; Sanctus Franciscus Borgia, II., Matriti, 
1903, xx-xxi, 504, 532, 535 ; SUAU, 64-66, 80-83 ; ASTRAIN, I., 275, 
284,285,287, 303, 304. 

2 POLANCUS, I., n. 211, 274; Petrus Ribadeneira, S.J., Vita 
Francisci Borgiae, P. Andrea Schotto interprete, c. 3, n. 52 (Acta 
Sanctorum, Octob., V., 246). 

^ Printed in Sanctus Franciscus Borgia, II., 545. 

4 POLANCUS, I., n. 276. 

VOL. XII. 7 


sano."^ Now already, while yet amid the preliminaries to 
his ordination as priest, Francis was setting forth "the 
greater glory of God " by his exemplary virtue, his 
wisdom, his influence over the wielders of spiritual and 
temporal power. Since his Duchy was the exclusive 
heritage of his eldest son and his remaining seven children 
had not means adequate to their position, Paul III. 
sanctioned, at his petition, on the 23rd of January 1549, 
his appropriation, as a provision for the latter, of 25,000 
ducats from the residuary estate of his great-uncle, 
Giovanni, Duke of Camerino and Nepi, who had died 

On their way to India the members of the Society 
touched the soil of Portugal. The Portuguese doctor 
Diego de Gouvea wrote from Paris to his former pupil 
Ignatius to ask whether he and his associates did not wish 
to evangelize the Portuguese Indies. Ignatius sent him the 
reply that " they were ready to go joyfully to the Indies 
when the Pope sent them." On this King John III. 
applied to Paul III. for six Jesuit missionaries for the East 
Indies. Ignatius, however, could only spare two, Francis 
Xavier and Simon Rodriguez. In Lisbon they had to 
await a passage, but there they so captivated the people 
by their apostolic fervour that they were implored to 
abandon their journey ; finally, with the Pope's consent, 
Rodriguez at last resolved to remain in Portugal.^ The 

* Ignatius to Borgia, dat. Rome, Sept. 20, 1548 (Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., 
ii, 233-237). 

2 The brief is in Sanctus Franciscus Borgia, I., 655-660; for the 
date, cf. SUAU in the Etudes, CI I. (1905), 186. The arrangements for 
raising a monument to Alexander were altered by Pius IV., and finally the 
scheme appears to have been altogether abandoned {cf. SUAU, loc. ctt.). 

2 Peter Faber to Gouvea, dat. Rome, Nov. 23, 1538 (Mon. Ignat, 
Ser. I., i, 132-134"): Rtbadeneira, De actis etc., n. 88, 89; Mon. 
Ignat, Ser. IV., i, 380-383 ; Vita Ignatii, 1. 2, C. 16 ; I. 3, c. 3. 


King entrusted the Society with the spiritual direction 
of the young noblemen who, to the number of nearly a 
hundred, were brought up at court. Almost all, Ignatius 
reported in 1542, go to confession and communion weekly 
and hear sermons every Friday.^ Many young men 
sought admission to the Order, and the King sent them to 
study at his University of Coimbra ; the college which he 
established there for the Society numbered in 1547 already 
115 members of the Order, including 92 scholastics; 
John spent yearly 3000 ducats on their upkeep. In 1545 
Ignatius had to yield to the King's pressing request that 
Rodriguez should undertake the tuition of his son. In the 
following year Rodriguez was also nominated Provincial 
of Portugal. For the college of Coimbra in the years 
1545-46 he composed, on a basis given him by Ignatius in 
Italy, a series of general rules and some also for special 
employments, which later were widely adopted throughout 
the whole Order. The Blessed Peter Faber praised the 
piety and discipline which he maintained among the 
Portuguese brethren.^ They were popularly called " the 
Apostles." When they passed through the country in 
their poverty, preaching and administering the Sacraments, 
every town and every village was open to them.* 

In 1548 the Jesuits Gonsalvez and Nunez passed over 
from Portugal to Morocco and conveyed to from 500 to 
600 Christian captives in the Moorish city of Tetuan the 

^ Report to the Jesuits in Italy, dat. Rome, June i, 1542 (,Mon. 
Ignat., Ser. I., i, 204) ; cf. also Orlandinus, 1. 2, n. 103, 105. 

2 PoLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 98, 99, 214; Orlandinus, I. 5, 
n. 57 ; 1. 6, n. 98. The rules were first given to the public in the 
Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 822-873 ; cf. ibid., 539, and Cartas del b. P. 
Fabro, L, 246, 247. 

^ Johannes of Aragon, S.J., to Martin Santacruz, S.J., dat. Lisbon, 
June 5, 1548 (Epistolae Mixtae, L, 514, 515). 


consolations of religion. Deeply touched by their afflic- 
tions, they returned to Portugal and collected clothes and 
medicines and money to the amount of over a thousand 
ducats. The King also committed to the Society the task 
of delivering captives.^ 

It was at the instance of Paul III. that the first Jesuits 
went to Ireland. His choice fell on Alfonso Salmeron and 
Pascal Broet ; they brought with them three Papal letters : 
one contained many ecclesiastical faculties; the second 
recommended them to the Irish bishops ; the third 
concerned their free passage through the country.^ The 
bearers were to visit in the Pope's name the Irish bishops 
and native princes, confirming them in their loyalty to 
the Church, exhorting the clergy, reforming convents, 
urging the erection of schools for Latin, pawnshops and 
similar beneficent institutions, and finding out suitable 
occupants for vacant Church offices. Ignatius specially 
urged upon them to adapt themselves as much as possible 
to Irish customs and " become all things to all men " ; if 
they had to collect fines or burdens they were at once to 
distribute the money through others among the poor or 
see that it was spent on religious objects.^ 

Salmeron and Broet reached Scotland under great diffi- 
culties. There Gavin Dunbar, Archbishop of Glasgow, and 
other leading men strongly dissuaded them from pursuing 
their journey. They would accomplish nothing, they were 
told, and in view of the hostility of Henry VIII. to Rome 
were imperilling their lives. Nevertheless, they determined 
to go on, and James V. of Scotland, the father of Mary Stuart, 

* POLANCUS, I., n. 289, 290; Peter Domenech to Araoz, dat. 
Almeria, March i, 1549 (Epistolae Mixtae, II., 91). 

2 The letters are given in Epist. P. Pasch. Broeti, 204-214; cf. 
A. Bellesheim, Irland, II., 80, 81. 

3 See Mon. Ignat, Ser. I., i, 174-181, 727-731. 


gave them letters to the Irish grandees and a companion 
for their journey. They landed on the island in the Lent 
of 1542; the Irish chiefs were entirely under the yoke 
of Henry VIII., and they had pledged themselves to a man 
to recognize the King as their ecclesiastical head and to 
deliver up the emissaries of the Pope. Loyal bishops had 
to go into concealment ; the convents were for the most 
part deserted, the people savage and split into factions : 
" Not one stone has been left upon another," wrote 
Salmeron. They heard a few confessions, bestowed 
indulgences and other graces, but the English were on their 
track and they had no place of refuge to receive them. 
Thus after a sojourn of thirty-four days they returned, in 
accordance with their instructions, by way of Scotland to 
Italy.^ "To outward appearance a failure," says one 
versed in Irish Church history,^ "this first mission of the 
Jesuits to Ireland was destined in course of time to bear 
much fruit." 

In France also the beginnings of the Order were not 
noticeable. Some young men were sent by Ignatius to 
Paris to study in 1540, and from time to time others joined 
them. In 1548 a group of eighteen students lived together 
in an annexe of the Lombards' college; they had their 
Superior and observed the rules of the Order, yet only 
a few knew that they belonged to the Society of Jesus ; 

* Salmeron to Ignatius, dat. Edinburgh, Feb. 2 and April 9, 1542 ; 
Salmeron and Broet to Cardinal Cervini, dat. Edinburgh, April 9, 1542 
(Epistolae P, A. Salmeronis, I., 2-9, 11-13; Epistolae P. Pasch. 
Broeti, 23-31); Edm. Hogan, Ibernia Ignatiana, I., Dublinii, 1880, 

2 Bellesheim, Irland, II., 82. Even R. W. DiXON (History of the 
Church of England from the abolition of the Roman Jurisdiction, III., 
London, 1902, 421), writing from the Anglican point of view, admits 
that this mission, " though unsuccessful," was yet " not without 


the majority were lads who dressed as laymen in clothes 
of different cut and colour.^ 

When in 1542, on account of the war between Francis I. 
and the Emperor, proclamation was made to the University 
of Paris that all subjects of Charles V. must quit France 
under pain of death and confiscation of property, eight 
members of the Jesuit colony in Paris migrated to Louvain. 
Here two of the most prominent citizens went through 
the Spiritual Exercises: the Inquisitor Dietrich von Heeze, 
once the confidential minister of Adrian VI., and the 
learned theologian Ruard Tapper, Chancellor of Louvain 
University. Heeze was ready to enter the Society, but 
Peter Faber, to whom he had made known his resolve, 
dissuaded him on account of his age and the great in- 
fluence for good he was able to wield outside the Order. 
The first recruit from Louvain was Cornelius Vischhaven,^ 
a priest of great piety and strictness of life. Peter Faber 
during a short stay in Louvain had so ingratiated him- 
self and his cause in the hearts of the youth of the 
University that, on the rumour of his departure for 
Portugal, nineteen undergraduates declared their wish to 
accompany him ; nine of them he sent thither.^ In 1547 
the members of the Order in Louvain chose Vischhaven 
as their Superior and drew up regulations for the order- 
ing of their common life. Ignatius confirmed the latter, 
but enjoined on the community that the permission of 

1 Viola, S.J., to Polcano, dat. Paris, July 19, 1549 (Epistolae Mixtae, 
II., 257) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, I,, n. 439 ; Oliv. Manareus, Com- 
mentarius, 63, 64 ; Orlandinus, 1. 9, n. 56. 

2 POLANCUS, I., n. 42, 55. 

3 Cf. Faber to F. Xavier, dat. Cologne, Jan. 24, 1544 (Cartas del 
b. P. Fabro, I., 209-216); Orlandinus, I. 4, n. 37-40, 82 ; W. van 
NiEUWENHOFF, Leven van den H. Ignatius van Loyola, 1 1., Amsterdam, 
1892, 5o-c;2. 


the Bishop of Liege should be invited for their corporate 

As in the Netherlands, so in Germany the first appear- 
ance of the Jesuits was, so to speak, the result of accident. 
Peter Faber had been instructed by Paul III. to accompany 
the Imperial ambassador Ortiz into Spain. Then Ortiz 
received orders to attend the conference on religion at 
Worms : he took Faber with him, and both reached their 
destination in 1540. Faber occupied himself with the 
confessional and the Exercises ; ^ afterwards he went 
with Ortiz to Ratisbon, whither the conference had been 
transferred and a Diet summoned. Here so many applied 
for the Exercises that Faber's time was insufficient ; 
some who had gone through them undertook to give them 
to others ; thus Cochlseus initiated the Bishop of Meissen 
and Robert Wauchope the Bishop of Spires ; Faber himself 
took charge of the Prince Abbot of Kempten and the 
Portuguese envoy. Ecclesiastical and secular princes 
became penitents of Faber, among them the Duke of 
Savoy. In a letter from Ratisbon of June the 8th, 1541, 
the Pope was informed : " No small benefit, as we know 
from experience, has accrued from the Exercises both 
among the princes and their subjects. Some were faltering, 
now they are strengthened ; some had already fallen away, 
now they are restored."^ 

From Ratisbon in the summer of 1541 Faber had to go 
with Ortiz into Spain. But he was soon to be back again 

* ViNCK, S.J., to the Cologne Jesuits, dat. Maestricht, March 31, 
1547 ; Crusius and Ignatius to the Louvain Jesuits, dat. March i and 
May 24, 1547, in Hansen, 72, 76, "jt, 87, 88 ; cf. L'^tablissement de la 
Compagnie de J^sus dans les Pays-Bas, Bruxelles, 1886, 8. 

2 Faber to Ignatius, dat. Worms, Dec. 27, 1540, and Jan. i, 1541 
(Cartas del b. P. Fabro, 31, 32, 38, 39) ; ORLANDINUS, I. 2, n. 107. 

3 Raynaldus, 1 541, n. 125. 


in Germany. Paul III., on the strength of reports received 
from the citizens of Ratisbon, summoned Faber with Le Jay 
and BobadiUa to Germany in 1542. Faber reached Spires 
on the 17th of April and awaited the instructions of the 
Papal nuncio Morone; the Rhenish district was assigned 
to him as his sphere of work. In Spires itself he gave the 
Exercises to the Cathedral cantor, Otto Truchsess von 
VValdburg, who afterwards as Cardinal and Bishop of 
Augsburg was one of the chief pillars of the Church in 
Germany.^ Morone then ordered him to go to Mayence. 
The Archbishop and Cardinal, Albert of Brandenburg, 
wished to make full use of his services for the restoration 
of the spiritual and moral condition of his clergy, fallen into 
deep decay. In Mayence also he was chosen as master 
of the Exercises by two of the best bishops in Germany: 
one was the gentle, high-minded Julius Pflug, Bishop of 
Naumberg, and the other the learned and eloquent Michael 
Helding, then Bishop-coadjutor of Mayence, later Bishop 
of Merseburg. Faber lived with the parish priest of St. 
Christopher and turned him, as Canisius expressed it, from 
a "concubinarius into a Carthusian." At the Cardinal's 
wish he began, in the winter of 1542, a course of lectures 
on the Psalms. Albert also had a plan of appointing him, 
with other theologians, to attend the Council of Trent.^ 

In the following summer Faber, with the Archbishop's 
consent, complied with repeated and pressing invitations 
to visit Cologne. The Archbishop, Hermann von Wied, 

* Cartas del b. P. Fabro, 73-100, 139-153 ; Memoriale Fabri, 17-21 ; 
UUHR, Gesch. der Jesuiten, 7 seq. 

2 Faber to Ignatius, dat. Mayence, Nov. 7 and Dec. 22, 1542 
(Cartas del b. P. Fabro, 163-166); Canisius to Busaus, dat. Freiburg 
i. d. Schw., Jan. 2, 1596, in Hansen, loseq.; cf. also Frid. Reiffen- 
BERGIUS, S.J., Historia Societatis Jesu ad Rhenum inferiorem, Coloniae 
Agripp., 1764, 3-12. 


an ignorant man and of totally mundane character, had 
summoned the apostate Dominican, Martin Bucer, in 
1542 to protestantize the archiepiscopal foundations of 
Cologne. A substantial portion of the Cathedral chapter, 
the secular Estates, and some of the Council of the 
Imperial city of Cologne were on his side ; the Catholics 
held back through fear of the Archbishop. Faber now 
bestirred himself and went to Bonn, where the Emperor 
and Hermann had a meeting in order to present to the 
Papal nuncio a memorial from the University of Cologne 
setting forth the necessity of some serious intervention. 
The representations addressed by the Emperor to the lax 
ruler of the archdiocese were productive of at least some 
good results ; soon afterwards a petition from Cologne 
reached the nuncio in which he was implored not to allow 
Faber to depart from the city. This was followed by a 
Papal command which provisionally detained Faber in 
Germany.^ Faber, whose sermons in Cologne were a 
great success,^ hired a house there and made it a home for 
the seven young Jesuits who, in the meantime, had gathered 
in the city. He was thus the founder of the first Jesuit 
settlement in German territory.^ 

In July 1544 Ignatius called him back to Portugal, 
and two years later he died in Rome ; the Church venerates 
him as Blessed. In his spiritual diary Faber noted on the 
loth of June 1543: Since he had come to know Germany 
the thought of such a people falling away from the Church 

» DUHR, 9-14. Canisius in his censure (made c. 1572) of Riba- 
deneira's Life of Ignatius affirmed that Faber also "on certain 
occasions had disputed with Bucer and other heretics "(Mon. Ignat., 
Ser. IV., i, 716). 

* Cartas del b. P. Fabro, I., 235, 236 ; R. CORNELV, Life of Blessed 
Peter Faber, Freiburg i. Br., 1900, 130-154. 

^ Memoriale 327; DUHR, 13, m. 


filled his soul with continual anguish. This sacred com- 
passion was never extinguished ; among the seven persons 
for whom he specially prayed were, besides the Pope and 
Emperor, also Luther, Melanchthon, and Bucer, and among 
the seven cities for which he had all his life long under- 
taken to intercede Wittenberg held the first place.^ 

The lovable and popular qualities which adorned Faber 
were also conspicuous in his companion Claude Le Jay ; 
he also looked for salvation much more in a reformation ol 
morals than in the contests of theologians. ^ The nuncio 
Morone in 1542 sent him to work about the Danube and 
in Bavaria. " I have hopes that his work will be of service," 
wrote Morone to Cardinal Contarini.^ Le Jay came with 
Wauchope to Ratisbon, where they presented the Papal 
letters to the Bishop and Chapter;* they could not, how- 
ever, obtain a footing. In the city Le Jay incurred odium 
because he urged the removal of a preacher of bad 
repute ; many of the clergy too were unwilling to change 
their mode of life, and the two strangers were threatened 
with expulsion from the city or immersion in the Danube. 
" We told them," said Le Jay, " that heaven can be reached 
by water as easily as by dry land."^ But at the beginning 
of 1543 Le Jay had to leave Ratisbon; he went to 
Ingolstadt and gave lectures at the University on the Holy 
Scriptures; he was called upon to introduce Moritz von 
Hutten, Bishop of Eichstatt, then living in his neighbour- 

* Memoriale 22, 29, 30, 299 ; cf. also Pastor, Reunionsbestre- 
bungen, 233, 306. 

2 RoDERiciUS, Commentarium, 453 ; Janssen-Pastor, IV., i6thed., 
8 Hansen, 2. For Le Jay, see Duhr, 15-24. 

* Wauchope to Farnese, dat. Ratisbon, April 13, 1 542 (Zeitschrift fiir 
kath. Theologie, XXI., 603). 

* Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Ratisbon, April to August 1542 (Epistolae 
P. Pnsch., Broeti, 270-276). 


hood, to the Spiritual Exercises ; then, in obedience to the 
Pope's commands, he went to Dillingen to Cardinal 
Truchsess.^ Here he was met by an invitation from Duke 
Ernest of Bavaria, Archbishop of Salzburg, to attend a 
Provincial Synod, at which he should sit as a member and 
vote. But he was aware that it would be contrary to the 
Pope's wishes to take part in deliberations on religious 
questions at the approaching Diet at Worms, and he was 
under the impression that this assembly at Salzburg would 
prepare the way directly for such deliberations ; he there- 
fore confined himself to receiving the resolutions in his 
chamber and expressing his opinion upon them. At 
Salzburg he also composed two theses: one maintaining 
the Bishop's responsibility for prohibiting, without special 
permission from the Pope, participation in the ecclesiastical 
debates in an Imperial Diet; the other, proving that 
Protestants were still heterodox if, even while holding 
another doctrine of the Faith, they denied solely and 
exclusively the primacy of the Pope of Rome. At the 
same time he made use of the opportunity of urging on 
the Archbishop the need of establishing a boarding-house 
for boys who were to be trained for the priesthood.^ On 
his return to Dillingen the Cardinal had already set out 
for Worms ; Le Jay had to follow him. His sermons in 
Italian, delivered during the Diet, pleased King Ferdinand 
and others in high station ; the bishops often invited him 
to their tables and asked him to visit their sees.* 

* POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 72 ; ORLANDINUS, 1. 4, n. 22-25. 

2 Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Dillingen, Nov. 14, 1544; Domenech to 
Rodriguez, dat. Rome, Jan. 29, 1545 (Epistolae P. Pasch. Broeti, 281- 
285, 775, 776) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 72. 

3 Le Jay to Ignatius, dat. Dillingen, Sept. 21, 1545 (Epistolae 
P. Pasch. Broeti, 293-296) ; Canisius to Peter Faber, dat. Cologne, 
Aug. 12, 1545 (BRAUNSBERGER, I., 159). 


Other tasks were allotted to Nicolas Bobadilla, Le Jay's 
colleague from the Order. Morone was of opinion that 
he should accompany the Imperial forces into Hungary, 
there to put a curb on the Lutheran preachers, attend to 
the spiritual interests of the soldiery, and exercise an im- 
proving influence on the clergy.^ He was kept, however, 
in Vienna ; the nuncio Girolamo Verallo wished to have 
him in his house, but Bobadilla preferred to lodge in 
a hospital ; he preached, gave expositions of the Epistle 
to the Romans, and prepared Jews and Turks for baptism ; 
King Ferdinand often had conversations with him. But 
soon afterwards began for Bobadilla a period of constant 
shifting to and fro with the most varied activity. With 
Verallo, whose nunciature to the Emperor was soon 
changed for that to the King, he visited Nuremberg, 
Spires, Worms, Brussels, and Ratisbon. In the intervals 
he was engaged in writing, preached in Latin at Passau 
and Ratisbon, visited, at the bidding of Cardinal Farnese, 
the Imperial camp during the Schmalkaldic war and took 
care of the Italian hospital, engaged in the reconstruction 
of the University curriculum at Cologne, and supported the 
Catholics of that city in their contest with the apostate 
Archbishop.2 In the address of a letter from the Bishop 
of Vienna, Frederick Nausea, to Bobadilla, the latter was 
termed " the most vigilant agent of the Apostolic See in 
all Germany."^ 

Bobadilla was always ready to speak and had much 

• Morone to Cardinal Contarini, dat. Modena, May 21, 1542 
(Hansen, 1-2). 

2 POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 40 ; Ferron by order of Ignatius to 
Rodriguez, dat. Rome, April 12, 1546 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., i, 377); 
Druffel, Beitrage, I., 20 seq. ; DUHR, 25-31 ; GiUS. BOERO, S.J., 
Vita del Servo di Dio. P. Nicol6 Bobadiglia, Fir^nze, 1879, 22-50 

• Eoistolae Mixtae. I.. '?6c;-^68. 


to say, sometimes with a touch of braggadocio. He 
spoke his mind to ecclesiastical and temporal magnates 
alike, with a frankness which more than once was disfigured 
by bluntness and discourtesy; it was on account of this 
that his German career came to an abrupt end. The 
asperity of his language with regard to the Interim led 
the Emperor to dismiss him from Augsburg;^ he went to 
Rome, where Ignatius gave him a cold reception.^ Canisius 
some years later gave him testimony : that he had worked 
hard for the Germans in war and peace, run great dangers, 
and " put a sturdy shoulder to the wheel " on behalf of the 
Catholic cause, especially at Diets of the Empire.^ 

Bobadilla and his two comrades had worked on German 
soil as strangers; the first German Jesuit and at the same 
time the greatest among them was Peter Canisius. Born 
in Nymegen in 1521 of a family of good standing, he 
studied at Cologne as a youth, taking his degree of doctor 
in philosophy in 1540.* Three years later he was led 
through the Spiritual Exercises by Peter Faber ; there, as 
he himself tells us, he heard the voice of God calling him 
to join the Order. He took the vows on the 8th of May 
1 543.'* Returning to Cologne from Mayence.he pursued his 

* Nuntiaturberichte, X., 327, n. I. 

* Mon. Ignat, Sen IV., i, 467. 

3 Censure on Ribadeneira's Life of Ignatius (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., 

i, 715)- 

* Canisii Liber primus Confessionum (composed in 1570), c 1-4; 
Canisii Testamentum (his spiritual testament, composed at Freiburg i, 
d. Schw. about 1596, shordy before his death), c. 12 ; (Braunsberger, 
I., 7-21, 34-40)- 

^ " One of the most important gains which ever accrued to the 
Society," says Friedensburg (Die ersten Jesuiten in Deutschland, 
Halle, 1905, 34). His "acquisition," remarks E. Zirngiebl, "was pro- 
ductive of a rich harvest to the Order in Germany" (Studien iiber das 
Institut der Gesellschaft Jesu, Leipzig, 1870, 262). 


theological studies ; in addition he began at once to lecture 
on academic subjects, gave Latin addresses to students and 
ecclesiastics, and preached simple sermons to the people ; 
he was also anxious to promote frequent communion, 
especially among young students.^ He was the first 
member of the Order to appear publicly as an author ; in 
1543 he published at Cologne an enlarged and improved 
edition of the writings of the mystic John Tauler the 
Dominican ; in 1546 this was followed by a Latin transla- 
tion in three folio volumes of the works of Cyril of 
Alexandria and of Leo the Great.^ The small band of 
Jesuits, consisting almost entirely of students, which had 
been formed at Cologne in 1544, was supported for the 
most part on the paternal inheritance of Canisius.^ The 
part taken by him in the struggle with Archbishop Hermann 
von Wied was an active one. He went, at the bidding of 
the clergy and University of Cologne, in quest of help and 
protection to the Emperor and the Papal nuncio in the 
Netherlands, then to Bishop George of Austria in Liege, 
and again to the Emperor and nuncio in Suabia.* From 
this last mission he was unable to return to Cologne, for 
Cardinal Otto von Truchsess of Augsburg sent him to the 
Council of Trent. ^ Then, in obedience to the General of 

* Canisius to Adriano Adriani, dat. Cologne, Aug. 2, 1546 (Brauns- 
BERGER, I., 208, 209) ; Testamentum, c. 2 {ibid., 38 ; cf. ibid., 1 12, 124, 
143, 160). 

2 BRAUNSBERGER, I., 79-93, 176-188, 215-222 ; SOMERVOGEL, 
Biblioth^que, II., 617, 618 ; VIII., 1974. 

8 Hansen, ii, 23-27; Sachinus, De Vita P. Canisii, Ingolstadii, 
1616, 32. 

* Canisius to Faber, dat. Cologne, Aug. 12 and Dec. 22, 1545, 
and to Johannes Cropper, dat Geislingen, Jan. 24, 1547, and Ulm, 
Jan. 28, 1547 (BRAUNSBERGER, I., 162-165, 233-240 ; cf. ibid.., 674-676) ; 
Matth. Raderus, S.J., De Vita Petri Canisii, Monachii, 1614, 36, n, 

* See supra, p. 80. 


the Order, he went to Bologna, Rome, and Messina ; his 
continuance in Italy, however, was not to be for long ; he 
belonged to Germany. 

After the death of Johann Eck the reputation of the 
University of Ingolstadt began to decline. In order to 
infuse new life into the institution the firm Catholic Duke 
William IV. of Bavaria sought permission from Paul III. 
to levy three-tenths on every convent and benefice in his 
dominions for this purpose.^ At the same time he asked 
the Pope to send him some Jesuits as professors of theology ; 
among them was to be Le Jay. The Duke found every 
encouragement in Rome, for Paul III. and those in his 
confidence were anxiously desirous of establishing Jesuit 
colleges in Germany.^ At the Pope's bidding Ignatius 
appointed Le Jay, Salmeron, and Canisius for Ingolstadt;^ 
Canisius was first sent for from Messina to Rome. On 
the 2nd of September 1549 he and his colleagues received 
the Papal blessing. On the way to Germany the three 
future professors of theology submitted themselves in the 
University of Bologna to an examination by Bishop 
Ambrogio Catarino and two other Dominicans, and then 
received from the Papal Legate, Cardinal Giovanni Maria 
del Monte, the cap of doctor of theology.* 

Meeting as they advanced with friendly receptions 
from the Cardinals of Trent and Augsburg and from the 
Duke of Bavaria, they reached Ingolstadt on the 13th of 
November 1549. The University prepared for them a 

* The brief of Paul III. is given by JOS. Nep. Mederer : Annales 
Ingolstadiensis Academiae, IV., Ingolstadii, 1782, 271-275. 

2 Ignatius to Salmeron, dat. Rome, Aug. 10, 1549 (Mon. Ignat., Sen 
I., ii, 509). 

* POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 428 ; cf. Mon. Ignat.. Ser, I., ii, 
360, 361, 378; Braunsberger, I., 296, 686-688 ; DuiiR, 53. 

* POLANCUS, I., n. 548 ; BraUNSBERGERj I., 685. 686, 


public reception, and on November the 26th Canisius 
opened his course of lectures.^ It was one of the last 
successes within reach of Paul III. that he was able to 
send Peter Canisius to the field of work for which he 
was the right man. The time had now come when a 
summons to halt was to be given to the victorious onrush 
of Protestantism, since of its previous conquests a portion 
were to be re-won. Canisius was one of the best leaders 
in these successful contests ; during their continuance 
under the successors of Paul III. he won for himself the 
name of a second Apostle of Germany and elevation to 
the altars of the Church by his academic exertions, his 
countless sermons and instructions, his compoiition of 
catechisms and many other writings, the accomplishment 
of arduous tasks laid upon him by the Pope, indefatigable 
work at the diets and other assemblies, the foundation 
and direction of colleges of his Order, and finally by his 
life of prayer and genuine holiness. ^ 

Before the call to Bavaria had come the Jesuits had 
received an invitation to cross over into Africa. The 
occasion was in some ways a remarkable one. King 
John III. of Portugal received one day a letter from 
Claudius Atanaf Sagad, the Negus of Abyssinia. The 
latter wrote : Some years before a man had appeared 
before him who stated that he had been recognized by the 
Pope of Rome as Patriarch of ^Ethiopia, but personally 

1 Braunsberger, I., 689-691 ; PoLANCus, I., n 432-434; Flor. 
RiESS, S.J., Der selige Petrus Canisius, Freiburg i. Br., 1865, 81-86; 
cf. also IGN. Agricola, S.J., Historia Provinciae Societatis Jesu 
Germaniae Superioris, I., Augustae Vindelicorum, 1727, 19, 20. 

2 For judgments of Catholics and non-Catholics on Canisius, see 
Braunsberger, I., xviii-xxiii. See also the exhaustive work of 
X. Le Bachelet: Canisius (Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, 
II., Paris, 1905, 1507-1537)- 


he evinced himself to be unfitted for such a post. The 
Negus wished to be informed if this man were really 
Patriarch, and if not, asked the King to send him one 
with due authority, for the Abyseinians wished to obey the 
Pope.^ King John could think of nothing better than 
to turn to Ignatius for help. His wish was, he wrote, 
that one of the Jesuits should undertake the Patriarchate.^ 
This was a case in which there was sore need of help. The 
cleric Juan Bermudez, who had joined himself in 1541 to 
a troop of Portuguese on their journey to Abyssinia, had 
certainly played the part, in that country, of Catholic 
Patriarch, but he had received from Rome neither conse- 
cration nor jurisdiction ; he was an interloper, not to say 
an impostor.^ Ignatius did not reject the petition, since 
it did not concern the acceptance of a dignity bringing 
with it pomp and leisure but of heavy and difficult 
burden* The transaction was not finally settled until 
I55S» when the Portuguese Jesuit, Nunez Barreto, was 
consecrated to the ofifice. 

The Order was more speedily settled on the Congo. 
The mission of the Jesuits was already begun here in 1548, 
but unfortunately the promise of its inception was not 
fulfilled. Loyola's disciples were happier in their Brazilian 
mission of 1549, when they successfully laid the foundations 
of the conversion of the South American Indians.^ 

* Rodriguez, S.J., to Ignatius, dat. Almeirim, March 18, 1546 
(Epistolae P. Pasch. Broeti, 543, 544). 

'John III. to Ignatius, dat. Santarem, Aug. 1546; Ignatius to 
Rodriguez, dat Rome, Oct. 1546, and to Torres, dat. Rome, Oct. 9, 
1546 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., i, 428-430, 434). 

' Cf. C. Beccari, S.J., Rerum Aethiopicarum Scriptores occidentales 
inediti, V., Romae, 1907, liii-lx. See also reports of Gott. Gesellsch. 
der Wissensch. Phil.-histor. Kl. (1904), "jo seqq. 

* Cf. Mon. Ignat., Ser. I., i, 430. 

* See infra, 5 1 6 seqq. 

VOL. XII. 8 


All these undertakings were as nothing compared with 
the results to which the Order could already point in the 
newly discovered regions of Asia, where history is linked 
with the fame of a man whose name is still reverenced to 
this day by friend and foe alike : with that of Francis 
Xavier.i On the i6th of March 1540 Xavier left Rome 
to go at the Pope's orders to the East Indies. On May 
the 30th he reached Lisbon, where he received four 
briefs: the first, dated July the 27th, 1540, appointed him 
Papal nuncio for the Portuguese Indies on both sides 
of the Ganges, and of the Cape of Good Hope, with 
full ecclesiastical powers; two other briefs enlarged his 
powers, and in a fourth he was recommended to the Princes 
and rulers of these territories.^ While Francis was waiting 
for a passage at Lisbon high and low showered marks of 
respect upon him : he consoled himself for the absence 
of tribulation by the thought of the sacrifices he should be 
able to offer in India ; to be long without suffering, he 
thought, was to be no true soldier of Christ.^ Suffering 
awaited him on the voyage, which lasted more than a 

On the 6th of May 1542 he landed in Goa. At once, 
as one of his biographers* relates, he threw himself 
at the feet of the Bishop of the country, the Franciscan 
Juan de Albuquerque, showed him his faculties, and 
declared that he wished to use them simply at the bidding 

* Cf. supra, p. 22. 

* Text of first brief and main substance of the rest in L. J. M. Cros, 
S.J : St. Francois de Xavier, Sa vie et scs lettres, I., Toulouse, Paris, 
1900, 484-486. 

3 POLANCUS, n. 23. 

* P. Sebastian Gonsalvez, S.J., who went to the East Indies in 1593 
and died at Goa in 1619. He composed a history of the Society while 
in India which is still unpublished (Men. Xaver., I., xxiv-xxv) ; his 
account of Xavier's first stay in Goa is in CROS, I., 214, 277. 


of the Bishop. He looked upon himself only as the 
fellow-worker of the Franciscans, Augustinians, and other 
apostolic men whose labours lay in this difficult region. 
The Christian population of Goa was morally in a bad 
condition. Xavier quickly made up his mind ; he made 
his dwelling in a hospital and began a fight in good 
earnest against the immorality of the Portuguese colonial 
officials;^ he collected alms from house to house for the 
sick, the poor, the prisoners ; ringing a little bell as he 
went, he called to the children and male and female slaves 
in the streets to come and listen to Christian teaching; 
he also taught them to sing songs in which truths of the 
Catholic faith were conveyed in verse.^ Already on the 
20th of September 1542 he was able to inform his brethren 
at Rome that so many had come to confession that in 
order to satisfy all he would need to multiply himself by 
ten ; he had also induced the prisoners to make general 
confessions ; the lepers outside the city had all become his 
good friends, and the viceroy was now sending him to a 
quarter where he had hopes of many conversions.^ This 
was the so-called Fisherman's Coast or Cape Comorin. 
Eight years before the baptism of several heathens had 
taken place, but as the place was barren and poverty- 
stricken, no Portuguese could settle there; the inhabitants 
were out of reach of all spiritual help. Xavier took with 

> Cf. A. HUHN in Katholik, 1899, II., 538 seq. 

2 GONSALVEZ, loc. cit. ; cf. also HORATIUS TURSELLINUS, S.J., De 
Vita B. Franciscici Xaverii, Coloniae Agripp., 1 621, 1. 2, c. 23 (i 12-120). 

3 Mon. Xaver., I., 256-258. The Monumenta historiae Societatis 
Jesu {cf. supra., p. i, see n. i) contain in the first volume of the 
Monumenta Xaveriana an edition of the letters of the saint. These 
were taken from the autograph copies in Spanish {cf also Cros, II., 
xxi-xl ; for earlier editions see SommervoGEL, Biblioth^que, \\ , 
1748; v., 882; VI., 1126; VIII., 140-143, 1326-1336 ; Gros, I., 


him three natives; afterwards he was joined by two of 
the Order. For a year he went from place to place 
leaving behind him written prayers which the inhabitants 
were to learn by heart and repeat daily.^ 

The chief opponents of Christianity, the Brahmins, tried 
to bribe him, but he inexorably exposed their shams 
and had the idols destroyed. Many sick persons, for 
whom he prayed or had prayers said by the Christian 
children, were healed. Sometimes he gave baptism to a 
whole village; "Often," he wrote on the 15th of January 

1544, "my arms are weary from baptizing and I cannot 
speak another word from having so repeatedly recited the 
prayers to the people, one after another, and given instruc- 
tions in Christian duties to them in their native tongue." 
But, as he says in the same letter, he thereby feels an 
indescribable inner consolation. Only one thing caused 
him sorrow : " How many there are here who are not 
Christians because no man troubles himself about the 
pious and holy work of making known the faith ! " ^ 

Details of Xavier's work in India were brought to 
Portugal by young Juan Vaz, who for six months had been 
his companion in these countries. " I will send you," says 
Martin Santacruz to Peter Faber on the 22nd of October 

1545, "some of the things Juan Vaz has told us": 
" Father Xavier goes about with bare feet ; his garments 
are shabby and torn. He is called the ' great father ' and 
all love him well. A king has given orders throughout his 
kingdom that all are to show obedience to his brother, the 
' great father,' as though it were to himself; all who wish 
are free to become Christians. He also gave him much 

* Francis Xavier to Ignatius, dat. Tutucorin, Oct. 28, 1 542, and to the 
Roman Jesuits, dat. Cochin, Jan. 15, 1544 (Mon. Xaver., I., 273, 278- 
289) ; POLANCUS, Chronicon, I., n. 47, 62, 64. 

■ Mon, Xaver., I., 283-286, 293. 


money, but Xavier gave it all away among the poor. 
Along the coast he has built from forty-four to forty-five 
churches. He has four native-born Indians with him whom 
he has had ordained as priests. Six other Indians from 
the College of Goa are on the point of taking Orders. 
He takes with him two, three, four, yea six thousand men 
into the open country, mounts on a tree, and then preaches 
to them."^ In the following years Xavier made flying 
visits, preaching everywhere to Christians and heathens, to 
cities and districts on the frontier and in the interior of 
India ; he carried his teaching to the island of Ceylon, and 
spent nearly a year in the Moluccas and the Isle of 

All that was related of his ecstatic prayer, of his com- 
passionate love for the children, the slaves, the sick, the 
sinners, the soldiers, of his prophecies, of his gifts of healing, 
of his raising of the dead,' gave to his preaching an almost 
irresistible power. On the 27th of January 1545 he was 
able to write from Cochin to Rome that in the short space 
of a month he had baptized more than ten thousand men.* 
He took special care to protect the newly made Christians 
from the greed of European adventurers and the violence 
of Portuguese officials. He called upon John III. in 

* Epistolae Mixtae, I., 231, 232. 

' See Fr. Ch. Danvers, The Portuguese India, I., London, 1894, 
481 ; P. COURTENAY, Le Christianisme k Ceylon, Lille- Rome, 1900, 

3 Testimony of Caspar Coelho, then vicar of St. Thomas's Church 
at Meliapur (in Cros, L, 308-310) ; Caspar Berse, S.J., to the Portuguese 
Jesuits, dat. Dec. 13, 1548 {ibid., I., 395) ; Francis Perez to the Jesuits 
of Coimbra, about 1548 (Selectae Indiarum Epistolae, 67, 68); 
Orlandinus, 1. 3, n. 99; 1. 4, n. 64; 1. 8, n. 127, 129; Franc. DE 
SOUZA, S.J. (ti7i2), Oriente conquistado i. Jesus Christo, L, 2nd ed., 
Bombaim, 1881, 20-31. 

* Mon. Xaver., L, 366, 367. 


strong and outspoken language to abolish such misdeeds.' 
What he had set on foot as a pioneer of the Gospel in 
different places is shown in the catechetical writings which 
he left behind hinn ^ and in the number of the members of 
the Order who, in ever-increasing numbers, were sent out 
to him from Europe. At the beginning of 1550, without 
speaking of Goa, the ground for colleges had been laid 
already in Bassein, Cochin, Quilon ; other Jesuits were at 
work in the Moluccas, in Malacca, in the island of Socotra, 
on the coasts of Comorin.^ Xavier, named Provincial 
for India in 1549 by Ignatius, could give him witness that 
amid the dangers of the greatest moral corruption these 
men had led unsullied lives.* The new viceroy of the Indies 
wrote to Portugal that the labours of the Jesuits resembled 
the labours of the Apostles of old.^ In the sensual mer- 
cantile city of Malacca in the year 1548 there were already 
many who frequented the Sacraments weekly — by 1550 
the city was almost entirely transformed. On the fisher 
coast the Jesuit, Antonio Criminali, displayed special zeal ; 
he fell there under the blows of savage assailants, the first 
victim of fidelity to pastoral duty.® 

* To John III., dat. Cochin, Jan. 20, 1544; Jan. 20, 1548; Jan. 26, 
1549; Malacca, June 20, 1549 (Mon. Xaver., I., 356-361, 450-455, 
509-512, 527-530); cf. also Orlandinus, 1. 4, n. 143, 153. 

2 Cy; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque, VIII., 1336. An exposition of the 
Confession of Faith, composed by Xavier in 1546 in the Moluccas, is in 
the Mon. Xaver., I., 831-844 ; other catechetical writings, ?(5/</., 819-831. 

2 Xavier to Ignatius, dat. Cochin, Jan. 12, 1549 (Mon. Xaver., 1. 476); 
Lancillotti to Ignatius, dat. Quilon, Jan. 27, 1550 (Selectae Indiarum 
Epistolae, 126, 127) ; Register of the missionaries in Cros, I., 481. 

* POLANCUS, n. 498 ; ORLANDINUS, 1. 9, n. I. 

6 To Simon Rodriguez, dat. Cochin, Jan. 5, 1551 (Selectae Indiarunx 
Epistolae, 130). 

6 Perez to the Jesuits of Coimbra about 1548 ; Lancillotti to Ignatfus, 
dat. Quilon, Jan. 27, 1550; Enrique Enriquez to Ignatius, dat. 
Punicale, Nov. 21, 1549; report of the Jesuit Cyprian on Criminali's 


Xavier's steps were closely followed by the Nether- 
lander, Caspar Berse, who was sent in 1548 from the East 
Indies to the island of Ormuz. He lived in a thatched 
hut, gave daily instruction to children and slaves, preached 
three times a week, and disputed on Saturdays with the 
Jews in the synagogue. Thirty shocks of earthquake which 
visited the island on his arrival he made the occasion for 
penitential preaching. Every day he heard many confes- 
sions, feuds and illicit connections disappeared, all priests 
reformed themselves, and the Jesuit was looked up to by 
all. Christian and non-Christian, as a prophet and a worker 
of wonders.^ 

From Cochin Francis Xavier wrote on the 20th of 
January 1548 to Ignatius and the other members of the 
Order in Rome : " When I was in the city of Malacca some 
Portuguese merchants informed me that a short time ago 
certain very large islands had been discovered in this part 
of the world, which are called the islands of Japan. There, 
so they affirmed, our holy faith might be spread with great 
success ; there more than any other country of the Indies 
were great things to be hoped for, since the people of those 
islands were quick-witted and eager to learn." ^ In Malacca 

death, dat. S. Thome, Dec. 3, 1549 (Selectae Indiarum Epistolae, 70, 
91, 92, 98-100, 127). Cf. [Tacchi Venturi] Nuove mem. e preziosi 
docum. intorme al P. A. Criminal!, Protomartire d. Comp. di Gesia, 
Venezia, 1900. 

^ Lancillotti to Ignatius, dat. Quilon, Jan. 27, 1550; Nuove di M. 
Caspar quali guinseroa Coa a' 10 di Ottobre del 1549; letter on the 
foundation of the College of Goa about 1550 (Selectae Indiarum 
Epistolae, 77-79, 120-122, 125-126 ; Polancus, Chronicon, I , n. 534- 
543 ; cf. also NIC. TrigaulT, S.J., Vita Gasparis Barzaei, Coloniae, 161 1, 

'^ Mon. Xaver., I., 433-435. Japan was discovered by some 
Portuguese certainly about the year 1543 (Hans Haas, Gesch. des 
Christentums in Japan, I., Tokio, 1902, 15-49). 


also the Japanese, Angero,^ came to Xavier, who converted 
him and determined to go with him to Japan. From 
Angero's accounts he had learned that in China, Japan, 
and Tartary the same religion, Buddhism, was professed, 
and his convert wished him to become acquainted with 
the "great schools" and to overcome them. From the 
universities Christian doctrine would penetrate among the 
people.^ The Indian friends of Francis Xavier were beside 
themselves when they heard of his plans. They set before 
him the exceeding dangers of the journey ; the sea was 
infested by pirates, and it was precisely Europeans, when 
they fell into their hands, on whom they were wont to 
perpetrate cruel tortures ; besides, there were many hidden 
reefs and frightful storms, " when out of four ships two 
are saved, this is much " ; Xavier was well aware of this, 
but he trusted in God, who has power over winds and 

Before his departure he wrote a letter to the General on 
his knees, as he himself tells us, asking his prayers for the 
undertaking.* With two brothers of the Order and a few 
Japanese converts he left Malacca on the 24th of June 
1549 for the island kingdom. As no other ship was to 
be found, he took the small junk of the Chinaman Necoda 
who, it would seem, was more of a pirate than a merchant. 

^ So Xavier calls him. In Japanese his name was probably Anjiro. 
Xavier himself was called by the Japanese historian Arai Hakuseki, 
" Frankusu Saberius" (Haas, I., 27, 28, 57). 

2 Xavier to Rodriguez, dat. Cochin, Jan. 20, 1549 (Mon. Xaver., I., 
487, 488). 

3 Xavier to Ignatius, dat. Cochin, Jan. 12, 1549, and to Rodriguez, 
dat. Feb. I, 1549 (Mon. Xaver, I., 477-479, 513). 

* Dat. Cochin, Jan. 12, 1549 {t'did., 482). 

* Alex. Valignani, S.J., Historia del principio y progresso de la 
Compafiia de Jesus en las Indias Orientales, I., i, c. 16 (Mon. Xaver., 
I., 88, 89). Valignani (t 1606), visitor of the Order in India and Japan, 


They landed in Kagoshima, the home of Angero, on the 
15th of August 1549. The latter converted his relations, 
and the Prince of Satsuma, to whom the city belonged, per- 
mitted all his vassals to become Christians. In November 
1549 Francis Xavier addressed letters from Kagoshima in 
various directions in which he thus expressed himself: 
Among all the peoples who have recently been discovered, 
the Japanese seem to be the best ; they have a high sense 
of honour, are valorous, seekers of knowledge; a great 
portion of the people can read and write; they listen 
willingly to speech concerning God ; only the Bonzes are 
addicted to unnatural vices. Xavier wished to go to the 
Emperor at Miako, the modern Kioto, then the university 
of Japan ; he was also thinking already of making his 
way, with the Emperor's help, into the Chinese Empire. 
He recommended to the leading teachers of the college 
at Goa the Chinese and Japanese youths who were study- 
ing there, begged the Jesuits of Malacca to show the 
greatest kindness to two Bonzes who were to land there, 
and called for three members of the Order to come to 
him in Japan.* 

The later work of Xavier in Japan and his plans for the 

composed in India an Indian history of the mission in two parts. The 
first contained Xavier's Life ; the FF. Enrique Enriquez and Francisco 
Perez, who had stayed in India with Xavier, supplied information ; 
P. Manuel Teixeira, who had been with Xavier there also, collected 
much material. The Life appears to have been finished by Valignani 
in 1574; it was first published in the Mon. Xaver. {cf. ibid., xxiii, 
xxiv, 199). 

^ Francis Xavier to Paolo da Camerino, Anton Gomes, Caspar Berse, 
to the Jesuits of Goa, to Pedro da Silva, etc., dat. Kagoshima, Nov. 3 
and II, 1549 (Mon. Xaver., I., 573-601, 642-655; cf. also H. J. 
Coleridge, S.J., The Life and Letters of St. Francis Xavier, II., 
new ed., London, 1881, 225-282); Delplace, Le Catholicisme en 
Japon. S. Fr. Xavier et ses premiers successeurs, Malines, 1909. 


mission to China, up to the day in December 1552 when 
he died on the island of Sancian in sight of the coast 
of China, He outside of the pontificate of Paul III, He 
had now proved himself to be already a great propagator 
of the kingdom of Christ. From Rome Xavier had been 
drawn to the farthest East, and from thence he was ever 
looking back to Rome. " I will," he wrote on the 5th of 
November 1549 from Kagoshima to Goa, " give an account 
to his Holiness the Pope, who is Christ's representative on 
earth and the shepherd of those who believe in Him, and 
also of all those who are on the point of coming to the 
knowledge of their Saviour and obedience to the Pope's 
spiritual jurisdiction."^ 

Xavier and his master Ignatius both alike became what 
they were through the Papacy. The latter once spoke of 
Manresa as his grammar school,^ his university was Rome. 
There the comrades of Montmartre received their call to 
form anew Order; there Ignatius met with the Church's 
approval of his designs, was chosen General, wrote the 
Constitutions of the Order, received from the Pope his 
sphere of work and spiritual authority; from thence he 
sent out his faithful followers into the wide world. The 
reputation and power of the Papacy were then shaken well- 
nigh to the ground ; a great portion of the clergy was 
defiled by greed and unchastity ; many convents were 
deserted or disorganized; the influence of the Church over 
the schools had, for the most part, vanished. Wide strata 
of the people were ignorant of and indifferent to sacred 
things ; the stream of heresy from the north threatened to 
sweep over Europe in a flood. On the other hand, new 
worlds had been discovered; millions were waiting for 

1 Mon. Xaver., I., 599. 

■2 RiBADENiciRA, De actis etc., n. 40 (Mon. Ignat., Ser. IV., i, 353, 


the message of salvation. It was therefore, so to speak, 
inevitable that a new Order should arise such as the 
Society of Jesus, with its devotion to the Roman See, 
its catechisms and spiritual exercises, its system of educa- 
tion, its message of war to error at home, and its message 
of the Gospel to the heathen abroad. 


The Turkish War. — The Meeting between Paul III. 
AND Charles V. at Lucca. — The Conciliar Question, 

The ambiguous attitude assumed by Charles V. at the 
close of the Diet of Ratisbon inflicted serious injury on the 
Imperial authority and on the Catholic cause. 

The Pope, like the German Catholics, was filled with 
deep mistrust, a mistrust intensified by the representations 
made to him by Francis I. ; ^ but the Protestants, as had 
all along been feared in Rome,^ felt emboldened^ to make 
further encroachments by the concessions they had suc- 
ceeded in exacting. The situation was made still worse 
by the unfortunate turn taken by the Turkish war. The 
consent of the Diet to a subsidy from the Estates had 
come too late ; before the resolution was passed the troops 
of Ferdinand I. had raised the siege of Ofen and on the 
2 1 St of August 1 541 had begun their enforced retreat. The 
Sultan, who appeared before Ofen on the 26th, deceived 
Isabella, Zapolya's widow, and by a combination of force 
and cunning made himself master of the capital of Hungary, 
which henceforth for one hundred and forty-five years was 
to remain subject to the Crescent. The whole country, 

* Cf. Dandino's *report, dat. Lyon, Sept. 28, 1 541. Nunz. di Francia, 2 
(Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

' Cf. the letter in Ehses, IV., 216, n. 4. 
" See Janssen-Pastor,*^ 512. 



from the Danube to the Theiss, was incorporated in the 
Turkish empire.^ 

With the Christian princes at variance with one another, 
Cardinal Aleander saw in the loss of the largest portion ol 
Hungary the prelude to the subjugation of the whole of 
Europe to the house of Osman.^ 

In Rome the news aroused such alarm that it seemed to 
many as if the infidel were already at the gates of the city ; ^ 
not less was the consternation in the territories of the 
Hapsburgs. In Vienna the thought of a second siege filled 
men with terror, but fortunately the hereditary possessions 
of the house of Austria were left unmolested by the Turks ; 
on the contrary, the Sultan on the 22nd of September left 
Ofen on his return march to Constantinople.* One reason 
for this certainly was the extensive warlike preparations of 
the Emperor,^ who had determined in person to strike a blow 
at the Turkish power in its most opposite extremity, the city 
of Algiers. With this object in view, as soon as the Diet of 
Ratisbon was over he made his way by Trent to Milan and 
from there to Genoa; thence on the loth of September 1541 
he journeyed to Lucca to hold a conference with Paul III/ 

* Cf. BUCHOLTZ, v., 153 seq.^ 159^6^.; DE LEVA, III., 449 seq. ; 
HUBER, IV., 80. 

2 See *letter of Sept. 12, 1541 (State Archives, Parma), in Appendix 
No. 8. 

3 See N. Sernini's *report, dat. Rome, Sept. 17, 1541 (Gonzaga 
Archives, Mantua). 

* Cf. ZINKEISEN, II., 845 seq. 

* Paul III. was made distrustful (see Turba, Algier, 7, 8); pre- 
cautionary measures were therefore taken in Rome (Le Legaz. di 
Serristori, w>,seq. ; Benigni, Miscell., V., 170 seq). 

^ Vandenesse, II., 190 seq. For the negotiations as to place of 
meeting, see DiTTRICH, Contarini, 780 seq. ; SiMONETTI, 7 seq. 
Cardinal Guidiccioni's *Ietter to Lucca, dat. Rome, Aug, 10, 1 541 
(State Archives, Lucca), gives interesting details. 


The Pope, despite the representations of his physicians 
and of the French party, left Rome on the 27th of August,^ 
leaving Cardinal Carpi behind as Legate.* On the 8th of 
September he entered Lucca in state, amid festive decora- 
tions and surrounded by Cardinals Farnese, Santafiora, 
Contarini, Henry of Portugal, Gambara, Cervini, Guidiccioni, 
and Trivulzio. He went first to the Cathedral and then 
to the episcopal palace, which was to be his resting- 
place.^ On the loth of September Margaret, the wife of 
Ottavio Farnese and daughter of the Emperor, arrived, the 
latter himself coming on the 12th, accompanied by the 
Dukes of Ferrara, Florence, and Camerino. Paul HI. had 
sent Cardinal Farnese and four other Cardinals to meet 
him at the Porta S. Donato. The two heads of Christendom 
exchanged greetings in the Cathedral. On the 13th of 
September Charles V. had a long conversation with the 
Pope in the bishop's palace. The latter returned the 
visit on the following day at the Palazzo della Signoria, 
where the Emperor was lodged. Return visits were paid 
to Paul III. on the 14th and 15th, and on the i6th he 

1 For the journey on which Siena was purposely avoided, see *the 
reports of A. Serristori of Aug. 2, 7, 31, and Sept. 3, 1541 (State 
Archives, Florence), *Min. brev. Arm. 41, t. 22 (Secret Archives of 
the Vatican), and Simonetti, 13 seq., 19. Samminiato wrote on Aug. 
31, 1541, from Acquapendente : "S. S'^ questa mattina partendo da 
Acquapendente et entrando in su il Senese volse la sua guardia seco " 
(State Archives, Lucca, Anz., 621). 

* Carpi was appointed on Aug. 12, 1541 (see Acta Consist. Cancell, 
Consistorial Archives, Vatican). 

3 Cf. SiMONETTi's full account (p. 19 seq.). See also the Diario in 
FUMI, Aumenti del Archivio di Lucca, Rocca S. Casciano, 1907, 44 seq. 
In the *Memorie di Lucca di M. Bertolani, f. 144 seq.^ the lodgings 
of the Cardinals are mentioned. Contarini stayed at the Abbey of S. 
Frediano, Cervini at the Bishop's palace, and Farnese with V. Guinigi 
(State Archives, Lucca). 


went to see the Emperor. The two final conferences 
took place on the 17th and i8th; Charles left Lucca on 
the 1 8th, while the Pope remained until the 20th.i On his 
way home he stopped at Bologna, Loreto, and Camerino ; 
October was drawing to an end when he again entered 

To the mass of subjects claiming the attention of Pope 
and Emperor fresh material was added by the arrival of 
the news of the capture of Ofen,^ whereby the Turkish 
question was opened out afresh. The time at their dis- 
posal was much too short to admit of the numerous political, 
religious, and private differences between them being 
discussed and final decisions formed upon them.* 

The point of first importance for the Emperor was to 
secure the Pope's aid in dispelling the menace of war 
from France, which was looming in the near foreground, 
on account of the attempt on the lives of the French 
diplomatists Rlncon and Fregoso, and threatened to 
obstruct the expedition against Algiers. Paul III. 
promised to do his best, and while still in Lucca a capable 
diplomatist, Girolamo Dandino, was despatched to France. 
He was to urge the maintenance of the armistice and to 
lay before the French King, Charles's proposal that the 
Netherlands instead of Milan should be the dowry to 

* See SiMONETTi, 29 seq., 31 seq. ; cf. Mazzatinti, Archivi, V., 
106. The Pope presented the Emperor with a valuable cross, two 
candlesticks, and a pax, works of Belli (see Lett, inedit. di C. 
Gualteruzzi di Fano, Pesaro, 1834, 42), and also gave him a Bull 
relative to half of the ecclesiastical income of the Netherlands (see 
Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 213). 

2 See Acta Consist. Cancell. (Consistorial Archives, Vatican) and the 
*notes of Cornelius de Fine in Cod. Ottob., 1614, f. 55 seq., Vatican 

' See Hasenclever in Mitteil. des osterr. Instituts, XXVJ, so^r 

* Cf. Corp. dipl. Port, IV., 398. 


be brought by his daughter to the Duke of Orleans.^ 
Paul III. had advised the cession of Savoy to Francis I., 
while the dispossessed Duke of that country would be 
compensated with Milan. He was probably led to 
suggest this scheme, which was rejected by Charles, by 
some arriere pensee with regard to Ottavio Farnese, whose 
name, however, had not yet been mentioned.^ The Papal 
policy concerning Milan was dismissed in the same way as 
the recommendation that the Emperor, instead of attack- 
ing Algiers, should go directly to the aid of his brother 
Ferdinand.^ As regards the religious affairs of Germany, 
the Pope spoke openly on the Recess of Ratisbon, against 
the terms of which Contarini addressed a protest from 
Lucca to the Cardinal of Mayence.* 

The Papal decision, which the Emperor wished for, on 
the Catholic League and the reform of the German Church 
had to be postponed, as there were not Cardinals enough 
in Lucca to form a consistory ; still, a prospect of the 
gratification of his wishes was held before Charles.^ The 
question of the Council was also gone into thoroughly at 
Lucca.^ The Emperor now showed himself to be so far 

* Dandino failed, as did N. Ardinghello, who was sent, on the return of 
the former, in the middle of Nov. 1541 (see PlEPER, Nuntiat., 122 seq.). 

2 See DE Leva, III., 455 ; cf. ibid., 476, n. 3, according to whom 
there was talk of Siena as well as Lucca, but no authentic proof of this 
is forthcoming (see Cardauns in Quellen und Forschs., XI L, 194). 
From Antella's *letter of Dec. 18, 1540, it is probable that Paul III. 
was then thinking of Milan for Ottavio (State Archives, Florence), 
see Appendix No. 7. 

3 See JOVIUS, Hist., i, 40 ; ^ TURBA, ^Zseq. 

* See supra, p. 477 seq. 

* See DE Leva, III., 456 ; Dittrich, Contarini, 788 seq. ; Hasen- 
CLEVER in Mitteil. des osterr. Instituts, XXVI., 305 ; Simonetti, 
37 seq. 

* Cf. Ehses, IV., 206 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 4, c. 16, n. 1,2; 
Dittrich, 788 j Korte, 48 seq. ; Pijeper, Nuntiaturen, 141 seq. 


compliant to the Pope's wishes as to be ready to accept 
Vicenza as the place of meeting. The Pope, who had 
spared himself no pains to obtain, before his meeting with 
Charles should take place, the acquiescence of Venice in 
this choice, received an inopportune check at this very 
moment by the final announcement, after long delays, of 
the Republic's refusal, actuated out of consideration for 
Turkey and France.^ It appears that the Emperor, with 
an appeal to the Recess of Ratisbon, suggested Trent 
as a place specially suitable.^ On this as on the other 
questions under consideration no definite pronouncement 
was reached at Lucca ; the Pope reserved himself for con- 
sultation with the Sacred College. 

On the 28th of September the Emperor, in whose suite 
was Ottavio Farnese, left the harbour of Spezia with 
his galleys. By a rapid descent on Algiers, which under 
the Turkish Pasha, Hassan Aga, had become a nest of 
piracy, he hoped to put an end to the almost unceasing 
pillage of the coasts of Spain, Naples, and Sicily and to 
divert the Sultan from an attack on Austria. The latter 
object was attained, but the undertaking against Algiers 
was a total failure. 

This had been foreseen by experienced observers, for 
at the advanced season of the year violent storms might 
be expected with certainty. Paul III. had already drawn 
the Emperor's attention to this at Lucca.^ The obstinate 
determination of Charles to carry out his plan was a grave 
mistake which he had to rue bitterly. When, on the 
20th of October, the African coast came in sight, the sea 

* Letter of the nuncio in Venice, the Bishop of Chiusi, to Farnese, 
of Sept. 3, 1 541; cf. for this and the foregoing negotiations with 
Venice, Capasso, Legati, 32-34. 

2 Ehses, IV. 207, n. I ; KORTE, 49 ; SlMONETTI, 36 seq. 

3 See TuRBA, as quoted in n. 2, p. 18. 

VOL. XII. 9 


was SO stormy that the landing of the troops had to be 
put off for three days. Even then heavy seas hindered 
the disembarkation of cavalry, artillery, and provisions. 
The troops, 22,000 in number, pitched their camp before 
the city ; they were full of courage and assurance, but 
all their hopes were soon shattered by the inclemency of 
the elements. During the evening of the 24th of October 
a storm broke out which lasted all night ; torrents of 
rain, with the volume of waterspouts, submerged the camp, 
so that the soldiers were wading knee-deep in slush and 
water. On the following morning the storm had risen to 
hurricane pitch and in a short space of time annihilated 
before the eyes of the army ten great galleys and more 
than a hundred transport vessels. Even more sensibly 
felt than the sacrifice of life demanded by this tempest 
was the loss in artillery, ammunition, and food-stuffs. The 
critical position of the camp was intensified, as the soldiers 
could not make use of their rain-soaked muskets against 
the onsets of the enemy. It was a desperate business to 
ward off the incessant attacks ; the courage and presence of 
mind of the Emperor alone saved the army from total ruin. 
As the most necessary supplies were lacking, the troops 
were compelled at great sacrifice and amid persistent en- 
gagements with the enemy to fall back upon Cape Matifou, 
where the remainder of the fleet had taken refuge. Here 
the soldiers were got on board, but fresh storms brought 
loss and disaster on the homeward voyage; at last, on the 
1st of December, the Emperor landed at Carthagena.* 

* Cf. together with SCHOMBURGK, Die Geschichtschreibung iiber 
den Zug Karls V. gegen Algiers, Leipzig, 1875 ; TURBA in Archiv 
fiir Osterr. Gesch., LXXVI. (1890), 25 seqq., who also examines the 
question of Charles's responsibility for the failure of the expedition (see 
L. Pastor in Histor. Jahrb., XII., 184 seq. ; see also Segre, Carlo II. 
di Savoia, 21 ; ARMSTRONG, II., 7 seq. ; Arch. Stor. Sicil., XXXI., 372). 


When in the middle of November news reached Rome 
of the unhappy issue of the Algerian expedition, the 
central point of public interest was, together with discus 
sions on ecclesiastical reform, the question of the Council. 

Immediately after the conference at Lucca the Pope 
had thrown himself with energy into the preparations for 
the Council.^^ Cardinal Farnese had already on the 5th of 
October 1541 commissioned from Bologna two of the 
most prominent members of the Sacred College, Contarini 
and Aleander, to make proposals regarding the time as 
well as the place of the Council irrespective of the circum- 
stance whether the Christian princes were at peace or at 
war, or whether there was agreement between them or 
not. The persons named were also to consider carefully 
the reform of the German Church as desired by the 
Emperor at Ratisbon, to propose personages fitted for 
the task, and to draw up a draft of instructions for the 
preachers. All this was to be got ready so as to admit of 
a speedier settlement on the return of the Pope to Rome.' 
As Aleander fell ill Contarini took the work in hand alone. 
It was ready by the middle of October ; as introductory 
to the reform of Germany, Contarini recommended the 
appointment as nuncio of Giovanni Morone, Bishop of 
Modena, to be accompanied by the Scotsman, Robert 
Wauchope, and two members of the Society of Jesus, 
With regard to the Council, Contarini abode by his 
opinion of its urgent necessity, which he emphasized with 
great precision. On the question of locality his unfortunate 
experiences had brought a change of mind and he also 

^ Cf. DiTTRiCH, Contarini, 791. "There cannot now," says Korte 
(p. 48), "be the slightest doubt of the Pope's sincerity in wishing the 
Council to be held." 

^ Farnese to Contarini, dat. Oct. 5, 1541, in DiTTRICH, Regesten 
385 ; cf. DiTTRICH, Contarini, 791 ; Ehses, IV., 208, n. 2. 


rejected Trent. Any German town he ruled out, not only 
on account of the existing unrest and the strength of 
Protestantism, but also because of the opposition of other 
nations. Besides, the Pope would be putting his life in 
danger if he were to visit such a cold climate at his 
advanced age. 

Yet a further reason there was ; since^^ the Recess 
of Ratisbon had demanded a council in Germany, it 
might seem a concession of weakness to give way on 
this point, as if the Council should assemble in virtue of a 
resolution of the Diet and not in virtue of the Papal 
authority. A council in Spain was out of the question, 
while to a city in France no Germans would go ; thus no 
other country remained but Italy. Here, since the 
Germans were opposed to Milan and the French to 
Ferrara and Bologna, Mantua had the strongest recom- 
mendations. It was near Germany, was an Imperial city, 
although not wholly subject to the Emperor, and offered 
all the requirements for such an assembly. Since the 
Germans did not travel during the winter, the right time 
would be eight days after Easter. As to the Recess of 
Ratisbon, it called for no further consideration, having 
been passed without the co-operation, indeed without the 
knowledge of the Legate and nuncio.^ 

With these well-grounded proposals Paul III. was in 
substantial agreement. All the efforts of the Imperialists 
to turn the Pope's choice on a German city were in vain. 
They only gained one point, that a final decision should be 
deferred until Morone, appointed on the 7th of November 
1 541 nuncio-extraordinary to the Diet at Spires, should have 

* Ehses, IV., 208 seq, Cf. the *report of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. 
Gonzaga of Nov. 11, 1541 : " M' ero scordato scriver di sopra come io 
ho inteso che facendosi il concilio si ragiona incominciarlo a Pasqua o 
al pii lungo a quelle del Spirito Santo" (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 


given his report on the opinion of the German Catholics ; 
in the meantime, Ardinghello, who had been sent to 
France on the nth of November, would also have fur- 
nished fuller information on the attitude of Francis I.^ 
On December the 17th Paul III. addressed a request to 
the latter as well as to the Emperor that they would allow 
their Cardinals to come to Rome to take part in the 
deliberations there to be held on the question of the General 

Francis I. adhered, even after this fresh exhortation 
of the Pope, to his old standpoint. Out of consideration 
for the Protestants and the Turks he was now, as before, 
against a Council;^ his objections to the Cardinals' 
journey were put so strongly that the nuncio Capodiferro 
saw there was little to be hoped for.* Paul III., neverthe- 
less, held firmly to his plan. On the 3rd of January 1542 
he discussed both the time and place of the Council with 
his Cardinals. They were all agreed that Whitsunday 
(May 28) should be adhered to as the latest date for the 
opening. The opinions as to place varied widely ; besides 
Mantua, Ferrara, Bologna, and Piacenza, Trent was also 
strongly recommended ; no determination, however, was 
yet arrived at.^ On January the 4th Morone left Modena 
on his journey to Germany,^ where twice already he had 

* Cf. Ehses, IV., 207 seq.^ 210 stq. ; Korte, 50 seq. For Morone's 
appointment, see Acta Consist, in Ehses, IV., 206, n. 5. 

2 Ehses, IV., 212. Cf. Ruggieri's *report of Dec. 19, 1541 (State 
Archives, Modena). 

3 See Capodiferro's, Dandino's, and Ardinghello's reports in EhseSj 
IV., 205 seqq. Cf. Pallavicini, 1, 4, c 16, n. 8. 

* See Capodiferro in Ehses, IV., 214, 215 seq. 

^ Together with Contarini's letter of Jan. 7, 1542, in Quellen und 
Forschungen, II., 217 seq.^ see also N. Sernini's *report of Jan. 4, 1543 
(Gonzaga Archives, Mantua); see Appendix, No. 1 2, 

« Laemmer, Mon. Vat., 398. 


supported the interests of the Holy See with distinguished 
success.^ In accordance with Contarini's proposal he had, 
as colleagues in the reform of ecclesiastical affairs, Robert 
Wauchope and three sons of St. Ignatius: Peter Faber, 
Nicolas Bobadilla, and Claude Le Jay.^ 

In Trent and Brixen Morone left traces of his reform- 
ing activity. In Munich he dealt with Duke William of 
Bavaria on the subject, and in Dillingen with the Bishop 
of Augsburg and the Cathedral Chapter. To the latter he 
made serious representations on the disregard of celibacy, 
on the lavish tables, drinking bouts, gaming and hunting 
parties in which the clergy indulged, and on their ignorance 
and want of mental culture. The capitular clergy listened 
to his remonstrances willingly, and showed a disposition to 
alter their manner of living. The Bishop, who was counted 
one of the most learned of the Prince-Bishops of Germany, 
thanked Morone for the Papal messages delivered to him 
and said that he would do his utmost to give effect to those 
admonitions ; at the same time he deeply deplored that the 
predecessors of Paul III. had not twenty years before 
taken the reformation of Germany in hand. Now, in his 
opinion, their efforts would be fruitless since the bishops, 
even with the best wish to do so, could effect nothing more. 
He proceeded to enumerate the chief hindrances: the 
exemptions of the Chapters, the ungovernable character of 
the German nobles, the support which the bad example of 
the clergy in moral relations finds in the licence of the 
Lutherans, the tyranny of the secular princes, and the 
deficiency of Catholic priests. Even from a council, the 
Bishop remarked, he no longer hoped for a remedy for such 
great disorders unless Germany first became united and 
laid aside her particular dissensions. In the course of 

» KORTE, p. 52. 

' Cf. supra^ p. 104 seq. 


these arguments he attacked now the Bavarians, now the 
Emperor and the other princes. Morone met this despair- 
ing pessimism with exhortations to pluck up courage and 
not to follow the example of the soured and listless who, 
while they bewail the past and despair about the future, 
stand with folded hands and let the opportunities of the 
present slip away, while the bad goes from worse to worse. 
The bishop must not imitate such, but use his gifts and 
learning in God's service, and if for the reasons adduced he 
cannot reckon on the full extent of his jurisdiction, he yet 
ought to try at least and unite the few souls over whom 
his authority extends.^ 

Apart from the ecclesiastical reforms which Morone was 
to introduce with the co-operation of the German bishops, 
Contarini's instructions also comprised important business 
bearing on the Pope's entrance into the Catholic League, 
the Turkish war, and lastly the Council.^ As the document 
relating to the Catholic alliance contained some expressions 
prejudicial to the Papal jurisdiction, Paul III. wished 
them to be recast in such a way as securely to establish 

* Report of Feb. 8, 1542, in Laemmer, Men. Vat., 402 seq. The 
pessimistic description given by the Bishop of Augsburg of the state 
of things even in those parts of Germany which remained Catholic, 
was confirmed later to Morone by Cardinal Albert of Mayence (see 
Laemmer, 412 seq.). For Morone and reform, see Pastor, 
Reunionsbestrebungen, 290 ; PlEPER, 142, n. 3 ; and DUHR in Zeitschr. 
fiir kathol. Theologie, XXI., 594 seq.., and Gesch. der Jesuiten, 7 seq., 
16 seq. 

2 Raynaldus (1542, n. 2 seq:) gives the text of the Instruction, dat. 
Jan. 9, 1542, from a very corrupt copy which Pallavicini (1. 4, c. 17) 
uses, a manuscript from the Secret Archives of the Vatican. There is 
also a copy in the Sec. Arch. Vat. in Varia Polit., 20, f. 238. See also 
iLHSES, IV., 214 seq. Another copy in the Graziani Archivis, Cittk di 
Castello, Istruzioni, I., 320 seq. For Contarini as the composer, see 
PlEPER, 142. 


his rights. As a subsidy the Pope was willing to give, not, 
as was demanded, a fourth, but a sixth only of the whole. 
He was ready to send 5000 men against the Turks if the 
Emperor would command the army in person, otherwise 
only half that number, and even that amount merely in 
the event of the Papal States being unmenaced by a 
Turkish landing. 

With regard to the Council, Morone's instructions were 
to announce the Pope's determination to summon one, but 
at the same time to state the reasons why the place of 
meeting could not be Germany. In the first place, the 
Pope wished to take part in it himself, or at least to be not 
far away, and at his great age it would be impossible for 
him to undertake the journey to or encounter the climate 
of Germany. Further, it was to be feared that owing to 
the agitated state of that country the treatment of ecclesi- 
astical questions there would only heat men's tempers the 
more and make the breaches between them still wider, even 
to the outbreak of war, a thing most repugnant to the Pope, 
whose wishes were directed only to the restoration of peace 
in Christendom. Paul III. wished, however, in the choice 
of a place to consult as much as possible the convenience 
of the German people; he therefore recommended in the 
first place Mantua, a city lying almost at the foot of the 
Alps, in the neighbourhood of Germany, and in other 
respects peculiarly suited. In case this proposal could not 
possibly be carried out he named in the second place Ferrara, 
also very favourably situated and well fitted for the pur- 
pose ; since, however, the latter place, although certainly a 
fief of the Church, but not under immediate Papal rule, 
could not with certainty be offered by the Pope, the Legate 
might propose Piacenza or Bologna, cities of the Papal 
States ; he was also fully empowered, if the Germans were 
in agreement with him on the point, to offer definitely one 


or other of these cities, Whitsunday was to be fixed upon 
as the date of opening.^ 

Morone, who in the course of his journey had discussed 
the subject of reform as well as that of the Council with 
Duke William of Bavaria at Munich and with the Bishop 
of Augsburg at Dillingen, reached Spires on the 8th of 
February,^ where the Diet was opened on the following 
day. The German princes were divided, as formerly, on 
the question of the Council. Duke William of Bavaria 
declared the Synod to be absolutely necessary and was 
in favour of its immediate opening. Mantua he preferred 
to any other place, but, if this were impossible, Trent; but 
he announced his intention of agreeing entirely with all 
that the Pope decided.^ Morone was displeased at finding 
on his arrival at Spires that almost all the spiritual princes 
were absent, so that there was no means of coming to an 
understanding with them. He regretted this all the more 
as he had a suspicion that the Imperial orators, Montfort 
and Naves, and King Ferdinand as well, were inclined to 
consent to the settlement of religious affairs by a national 

' The proposal of the above-named four cities arid of the Whitsun- 
tide term correspond with the results of the consistorial discussion 
on Jan. 3, 1542 {cf. supra, p. 133). On Jan. 28 Farnese wrote to 
Morone that he would adhere to his proposal of those four places as 
being the most suitable for the purpose ; he recommended Bologna 
for preference, but Morone was to report on the feeling there so that 
further steps should be taken in accordance therewith (PlEPER, 176). 
Farnese wrote in the same sense to Poggio on Feb. 5, observing that 
Trent in itself was certainly not regarded with dislike by the Pope, but 
that the latter saw objections to it in other quarters (Francis I.) and 
therefore fell back on the other four cities : Mantua, Ferrara, Bologna, 
Piacenza (Ehses, IV., 2\bseq). 

2 See Verallo's report of Feb. 12, 1542 (Secret Archives of thf 
Vatican) ; cf. Morone in Laemmer, Mon. Vat, 403. 

8 Morone to Farnese, dat. 1542, Feb. 8 (Laemmer, 401). 


council or by another Diet^ in order to guarantee the 
help of the Protestants against the Turks. The King of 
the Romans, moreover, who was then only occupied with 
the demand for support throughout the Empire against 
the Turks, saw with dissatisfaction that the Pope's repre- 
sentatives were bent on separate negotiations with the 
Catholic Estates.^ Already in the first audience, given on 
the 9th of February, he tried to induce Morone to explain 
the task with which he was entrusted in a session of the 
Diet. Morone had to refuse, since he was not instructed 
to this effect and had no letters of credence to the Diet 
but only to certain individual princes.^ He told the King 
and the vice-chancellor Naves that he was not at Spires 
to negotiate with the Diet but with the Emperor and the 
King of the Romans, in the Pope's name. On further 
pressure, however, from Ferdinand he applied through 
Farnese to the Pope for power to address the Diet on 
the subject both of the Turkish war and of the Council.* 

Ferdinand thought, as Morone did not fail to observe, 
that in the public session no one would venture to declare 
himself against the Recess of Ratisbon, while he feared 
that the nuncio might succeed in isolated negotiations in 
winning over individuals to a hostile position,^ The King 
was also displeased at the promptitude with which Morone 
had announced openly that the Pope had resolved to 
open the Council at Whitsuntide.^ The Bishop of Spires, 
who was the only ecclesiastical prince present at the time 

* Same to same, dat. 1542, Feb. 10 (Laemmer, 404). Cf. Korte, 

52 seq. 

2 Same to same, dat. 1542, Feb. 10 (Laemmer, 404, 411). C/: Korte, 

' Same to same, dat. 1542, Feb. 10 (Laemmer, 407 seq.). 

* Ibid. (Laemmer, 409, 410). 

6 Laemmer, 404. /^/^_^ ^jq seq. 


of the nuncio's arrival, said that he would accept the 
Pope's orders, but recommended the Council to be held 
in Germany in order to cut off all further excuse for 
calumnious statements about the Holy Father ; he pro- 
posed Metz or Trent, both of which places in a certain 
degree were in Germany and yet out of Germany.^ The 
Cardinal of Mayence, on the contrary, with whom after his 
arrival Morone had long consultations, declared that the 
hindering of the council in Germany would be dangerous 
even although certain bishops were in favour of it, but the 
speedy assemblage of the Synod he thought very necessary.^ 
In a letter written by Farnese on the 6th of March' 
Morone received the permission desired by Ferdinand. 
He was now at liberty to lay before the Diet all his in- 
structions regarding the Turkish subsidy and the Council. 
As regards the Council, he was to explain that the Pope, 
who had always been ready to hold the Synod and had 
offered it, was now more than ever determined to carry 
out his wishes. In order on his part to remove every 
doubt and impediment, the Pope would also be glad to 
summon the General Council to Trent, if none of the cities 
of which prior mention had been made were found suitable.* 
With regard to the opening of the assembly, the Pope 

* Laemmer, 404. 

* Morone to Farnese, dat. 1542, Feb. 20 (Laemmer, 413). 

3 In PlEPER, 177-181. For portion relating to Council, see also 
Ehses, IV., 217 seq. 

* KORTE (p. 54) thinks that the Pope's sudden compliance in the 
matter of Trent is to be explained by the conviction at Rome that 
neither Francis I. nor the Emperor wished the Council to be held. 
The danger of the situation was thus diminished, while at the same 
time a more favourable complexion was given to the Pope's obligingness. 
The actual course of events showed, on the contrary, that the Pope was 
acting quite honestly in trying to obviate the slightest pretext foi 
objection on the part of the Emperor or Germany, 


even now would prefer that it should be fixed for Whitsun- 
tide; but if, as time wa? advancing, it should be found 
desirable to postpone the date, he left the settlement of 
that point to Morone's discretion ; as soon as his answer 
was received the Bull of summons would be prepared. 

On the receipt of these instructions Morone, on the 
23rd of March, laid before the Diet the Pope's proposals 
regarding the subsidy for the Turkish war and the Council.^ 
He spoke strongly of the Pope's determination, and re- 
marked that matters had hitherto been in suspense only 
at the request of the Emperor and King Ferdinand. In 
accordance with his previous instructions he unfolded the 
reasons which had led the Pope ostensibly to object to a 
German meeting-place for the Council ; he mentioned the 
four cities which had been proposed at first, but then ex- 
plained that his Holiness, if these places for various 
reasons should be deemed less suitable, offered to summon 
the Council to Trent in order to meet more fully the wishes 
of the German nation and to obviate all hindrances. As 
the date of opening he proposed the 15th of August, the 
festival of the Assumption of Our Lady. 

The Protestants, who had abstained from appearing at 
the session, at once raised a protest ^ against a Council the 
summons to which depended on a Pope, while the Electors 
and Catholic Estates were satisfied with the proposals. 
Subsequently, on the 30th of March, Morone received a 
fresh letter from Farnese of the 21st according to which 
the seat of the Council had been again dealt with in 

* Propositio facta per lo. Moronum episcopum Mutinensem nuntium 
Apostolicum in dieta Spirensi die 23 Martii 1542 (Ehses, IV., 218 seq.). 
Cf. also Morone's letter to Farnese of March 28 in Laemmer, 420, 
and that to E. Gonzaga of March 29 in Solmi, Contarini, 90 seq. ; cf. 

also WiNKELMANN, III., 252. 

* Ehses, IV., 219 j«^. 


consistory on March the 15th, and besides Trent, Cambrai 
had also been taken into consideration, the latter appear- 
ing to a majority of Cardinals to be preferable to Trent 
on account of its situation and out of regard for the 
existing political relations. To the Pope both places were 
acceptable ; Cambrai indeed was less convenient owing to 
its being further off; but as the object of the Council 
was the general good of Christendom, he would give his 
decision in favour of that one of the two cities which 
should be considered most adapted for that object. The 
nuncio was to confer with the King on the subject and 
with any other person whom he thought it good to 
speak to.^ 

Morone was upset by this message.^ He feared, not 
without reason, that fresh suspicions would be aroused in 
the Germans concerning the sincerity of the Pope's inten- 
tions. On the 1st of April, having on that day received 
the verbal reply of the Estates to his former proposals, he 
laid before the Diet, on the advice of King Ferdinand, a 
fresh proposition in which, besides Trent and the four 
Italian cities, he recommended Cambrai.^ Previously, how- 
ever, he had already made corresponding communications 
to the Electors of Mayence and Treves, and to Bavaria 
and some other Catholics.* As he had feared, this new 
proposal was no better received by the Catholics than by 
the Protestants ; even on the Catholic side it was suspected 

1 InPlEPER, 181-183. Cardinal E.Gonzaga,*writing to the Marchese 
del Vasto, says of the consistory of March 15, 1542 {cf. EhSES, IV., 
218, n. i) : " II card. Trivnltio ha nominato Geneva per luogo confi- 
dente a tutti i principi christiani da congregarvi il concilio, della qual 
cosa ognino e massimamente il Papa s' 6 maravigliato." Cod. Barb, 
lat., 5790, f. 151, Vatican Library. 

2 Morone to Farnese, dat. April 3, 1542 (Laemmer, 424-428). 
' Ehses, IV., 220. 

* Morone to Farnese, dat. April 3, 1542 (Laemmer, 424 seg.). 


that the Pope had no intention of holding the Council 
and was trying in this way to evade it. The nuncio was 
accused of disingenuousness and vacillation.^ On the 4th 
of April Morone received the written answer of the Estates,- 
which corresponded to the verbal declaration of their 
deputies made on April the ist. Cambrai was not even 
mentioned ; on the other hand, the Estates declared that 
if no more suitable city in the Empire, Ratisbon foi 
instance, or Cologne, was to be obtained from the Pope, 
they wished, in that case, for Trent in preference to the 
other places named, and they earnestly begged that the 
Council might be convened and held without further 

The attitude of Ferdinand towards the demands of the 
Protestant 2 Estates caused Morone and the nuncio Verallo 
not less anxiety than the question of the Council. The 
Papal representatives were not sparing of warnings against 
further concessions; but the King had an eye for his 
necessities which forced him to give his consent to things 
of which at first he had taken no thought* By the Recess 
of the nth of April the Ratisbon conditions of peace, to- 
gether with the suspension of all causes affecting matters of 
religion pending before the Imperial Courts, were extended 
over another five years. As regards the Council, the 
Recess held to the 15th of August as the date for its 
opening and reiterated the wishes expressed in the letter 
of April the 4th ; the protest of the new religionists was 

* Morone to Farnese (Laemmer, 427) ; Morone to Farnese, dat. 
April 4, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 221, n. i). 

2 Ehses, IV., 221. 

3 Cf. Verallo's letter of March 30, 1542 (Nunziat. di Germania, 
Secret Archives of the Vatican). See also Morone's report of March 
28, 1542, in Laemmer, 421 seq. 

* Cf. Verallo's *report of April 6, 1 542 (Laemmer, 421 seq.). 


expressly mentioned.* Ferdinand justified his fresh compli- 
ance by the state of his affairs which, at the present juncture, 
forced him to shut his eyes.^ The King of the Romans 
was soon to learn from experience what the Turkish war 
subsidy voted in the Diet of Spires was worth. 

The Diet had promised to raise 40,000 foot and 8000 
horse soldiers within six months. These troops were to 
be assembled at Vienna by the beginning of May ; but 
the promise was not kept either with regard to time or 
numbers. It was the beginning of July before 30,000 were 
in readiness, in addition to which Paul III., to the disgust 
of the French,^ sent 3000 infantry and 500 horsemen,* 
somewhat more than he had stipulated ; these troops 
reached Vienna on the 3rd of July. With the contingents 
raised by Hungary and the Austrian and Bohemian 
Estates the host increased to upwards of 55,000 men. 
Want of money, with the accompanying lack of discipline 
and insubordination among the soldiery, put a check to 
any active operations. At last, in September, the army 

* See Neue Sammlung der Reichsabschiede, II., 444 seq. ; 
BucHOLTZ, v., 16 seq. ; Janssen-Pastor, III., 1 8th ed., 521 ; Ehses, 
IV., 223, n. 2 ; KORTE, 55 seq. 

2 Cf. Verallo's *report, April 12, 1542 (Nunziat. di Germania, 
Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

^ " Dicono il Papa inclinar alia banda imperiale, anchora che 
mostri pur di starsene nella sua neutralita, perche S. B. ha chiariti 
Francesi, che vuol aiutar 1' Imperator et il re de Romani contra '1 
Turco, di che non si contentano molto," *vvrote Cardinal E. Gonzaga 
to the Marchese del Vasto on March 27, 1542. Cod. Barb, lat., 5790, 
f. 145 (Vatican Library). 

* The infantry was commanded by Paolo Vitelli, the cavalry by the 
Marchese Sforza Pallavicini (great-grandfather of the Cardinal). Cf. 
the*briefs to Sforza Pallavicini of Jan. 5, 1542, to Ferdinand I., and to 
the " Protonotarius de Medicis," appointed commissary-general, the 
two latter of May 29, 1542. Min. brev. Arm., 41, t. 23, n. 12 ; t. 24, 
n. 446, 456 (Secret Archives of the Vatican), 


took the field. If this ended in a scandalous disaster the 
chief blame rested on the incompetent commander-in-chief, 
Joachim, Elector of Brandenburg, and the spirit of disaffec- 
tion among the unpaid soldiers which culminated in open 
mutiny. As the assault on Ofen by the Papal troops 
was not supported by their German comrades, the attempt 
failed ; without having effected the most meagre results 
Brandenburg decided to withdraw; and the great army 
disbanded itself "amid the derision of all Christendom."^ 

In a consistory held on the 26th of April 1542, 
Paul III., notwithstanding the French ^ opposition, finally 
decided to summon the Council to Trent ^ out of regard 
for the wishes of Germany. After this important matter 
had been discussed again on the 5th and 12th of May in 
consistory the Bull was read aloud on the 22nd and its 
publication agreed to.* This took place on the Feast of 
SS. Peter and Paul.« 

* Cf. KArolyi, a nemet birodalom nagy hddi vdllata Magyarors- 
zdgon 1542 ben, Budapest, 1880; Ruber, IV., 86 seq. \ Traut, 
Joachim II. und der Tiirkenfeldzug von 1542, Gummersbach, 1892; 
JANSSEN- Pastor, III., l8th ed., 524 seq. In 1543 Fiinfkirchen and 
Gran were taken by the Turks (see BUCHOLTZ, V., 189 j^^. ; HAMMER, 
III., 248 seq. ; ZiNKEiSEN, II., 850 seq). 

2 See in Vol. XI., App. No. 37, the report of N. Sernini of March 18, 
1542 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

8 Cf. Acta Consist, and Farnese's letter of April 28, 1542, in EhsES, 
IV,, 223, and the *reports of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga of 
April 22 (see App. No. 14) and April 30, 1542. In the latter it says: 
There was a consistory " Mercordi : N. S. ordinb che si spedisca la bolla 
del concilio a Trento." Then the question arose, who was to be 
Legate? "si dice di Contarini, Parisio e Chiete et S. Croce ; ma Dio sa 
se bisogneranno et sel Turco vien cosi potente, come si dice, si penserk 
pill alia guerra che al concilio" (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

* See Acta Consist, in Ehses, IV., 223. 

6 See Farnese's letter of June 29 in EhseS, IV., 232 ; cf. MeRKLE, 
I., %\tseq. 


In the important document drawn up by Sadoleto^ and 
dated May the 22nd, Paul III. glanced back at his 
endeavours to promote the Council since the beginning 
of his pontificate, on his various earlier convocations and 
the reasons then existing for the frustration of his plans ; 
he then announced that he was determined to wait no 
longer for the consent of any princes, but fix his eyes only 
on the will of Almighty God and the general good of 
Christendom. He summoned the Council to Trent on All 
Saints' Day, the ist of November.^ 

The Conciliar Bull met with a most unfavourable 
reception. Francis I. met it with a flat refusal ; he de- 
clared to the nuncio Capodiferro that since Trent had been 
chosen without his consent, and was a city which offered 
no security to his subjects, he would not suffer the Bull 
to be published in his kingdom. The nuncio made 
counter-representations in vain. The King angrily 
remarked he would see to it if anyone dared to act 
contrary to his command ; his determination to refuse 
recognition to the Council of Trent, which served only 
the Emperor's interests, was irrevocable.^ 

Not less troublous were the experiences of the nuncio 
Verallo and the Papal private chamberlain Otto Truchsess 
von Waldburg, who was sent specially to convey the Bull 
to the Diet opened at Nuremberg in August 1542. Both 
gave notice of the Council* in lengthy orations to the 

^ This interesting fact, hitherto unknown, I took from a *report 
from N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. Rome, May 27, 1542: 
" L' ultimo consistorio fu lunedi passato, nel qual il card. Salviati lesse 
la boUa del concilio fatta dal card. Sadoleto " (Gonzaga Arch., Mant.). 

* Best and latest copy of the Bull, also of all editions of the Tridentine 
Canons and Decrees, in Ehses, IV., 226-231. 

3 See the nuncio Capodiferro's report of July 24, 1542, in Ehses, 
IV. 233. 

* See Ehses, IV., 234 seq., 236 seg. 

VOL. xn. 10 


Diet on August the 13th. While the Protestants "renewed 
their protest, the Catholic Estates gave answer to the 
envoys of Paul III. first orally on the 17th of August and 
afterwards in writing ; they thanked the Pope, and ex- 
pressed their readiness to attend the Council either in their 
own persons or, in case of hindrance, in those of their 
envoys and procurators.^ King Ferdinand, in his letter of 
reply to the Pope of September the 21st, 1542, notified his 
joyful readiness in complying.^ While the Protestants had 
nothing but ridicule for the Council, the Catholics, as 
Verallo learned in private conversation, doubted for the 
most part whether the Synod, in view of the disturbed 
state of Europe, would ever meet at all.^ In the Recess of 
the Diet the Council was not even mentioned, an omission 
significant of the general opinion.* Otto Truchsess, in 
obedience to his orders, went from Nuremberg to Poland, 
where, on the 15th of October, he gave intimation of the 
Council to King Sigismund in Cracow.^ He likewise pre- 
sented the Bull to the Archbishop of Gnesen, who forthwith 
communicated its contents to his clergy and the episcopate 
in a Provincial Synod.^ 

The summoning of the Council called forth marked signs 
of disfavour from the Emperor. This was connected with 
the neutrality strongly maintained by Paul III. and the 
renewed outbreak of war with France 

* Ehses, IV., 237, n. 3, and 237 seg. 

^ Ibid., IV., 248; cf. Massarelli, Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 


^ See Farnese's letter of Sept. 4, 1542, in Ehses, IV., 237, n. 3. Cf. 
the *report of Verallo, Aug. 18, 1542, Nunziat di Germania (Secret 
Archives of the Vatican). 

* Cf. KORTE, 58. 

6 Ehses, IV., 259-261. 

" The Archbishop of Gnesen (Petrus Gamiat) to Paul III., dat. 
Krakau, Nov. 7, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 279 seq^. 


Paul III. had done all in his power to prevent the 
unholy conflict between the two most powerful sovereigns 
of the West. When the Pope in December 1541 sent his 
chamberlain Giovanni Ricci to Siena to report to Granvelle 
on the ineffectual mission of Ardinghello, the Emperor's 
representative thanked him in the warmest terms for the 
Pope's intervention in behalf of peace.^ At the end of 
March 1542 Ricci was again sent by the Pope,^ always 
hopeful of maintaining peace, to the two contending 
princes.^ He carried with him on this occasion a brief 
for Francis I. with an autograph postscript by Paul III. 
containing earnest exhortations to peace.* Not till the 
24th of May did Ricci, eagerly awaited by the Pope, return 
to Rome,^ only to set forth again immediately on the 30th 
of May to hasten ^ with fresh pacific messages to the French 
and Imperial courts. On the 7th of June he reached 

* See Appendix No. 11 for Ricci's *report of Dec. 29, 1541 (Ricci 
Archives, Rome). 

' On March 29, 1542, N. Sernini *wrote to Cardinal E. Gonzaga : 
" Ho inteso di nuovo per buona via che N. S. ha buona speranza che 
debbia succedere pace fra 1' Imp'® et Francia, pure 11 piu che non 
credono, ricordandose delle cose passate, pure 1' occasione fanno mutare 
proposito " (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). Cf. the *letter of Cardinal 
E. Gonzaga to the Marchese del Vasto (Cod. Barb, lat, 5790, f. 156, 
Vatican Library). 

' See Rayn ALDUS, 1542, n, 21. 

* Seethe *brief of March 27, 1542, in Appendix No. 13, from the 
original in Ricci Archives, Rome. Ricci left on March 28 ; see the 
♦report of A. Serristori of March 29, 1 542 (State Archives, Florence, 
Med. 3264). 

* See Serristori's letter of May 26, 1 542. Ricci on his return reported 
the Pope's longing and hope for peace in his *letters of May i, 5, 8, and 
14, 1542 (State Archives, Florence). 

® See the *brief to Charles V. of May 29, 1542 (Ricci Archives, Rome). 
Cf. Farnese's *letter to Poggio of June 4, 1542 (Chigi Library, Rome, 
LIII., 65). 


Francis 1.^ Although the King's demeanour offered but 
little prospect of peace, Ricci, on the i6th of June, was 
with the Emperor with new proposals of mediation.^ 

In Italy, at this time, the renewal of hostilities was 
looked upon as inevitable. Even the Pope's optimism was 
ahaken,^ and he began to see that he was cherishing but 
dwindling hopes of the prevention of the unholy strife. 
Nevertheless he was determined, under cover of his un- 
broken neutrality* to press to the utmost his proposals 
for mediation. 

The Imperial ambassador Aguilar and the Roman 
envoy of the Duke of Florence took every opportunity 
at this time to influence Paul III. to become the partisan 
of Charles V. When the war actually broke out in July 
they redoubled their efforts in this direction, but without 
success. They reminded the Pope that he himself pre- 
viously had undertaken to declare against Francis if he 
made common cause with the Turk. Paul III, thereupon 
replied that he was only waiting for Ricci's return,^ which 
took place on the 22nd of July.^ It was evident that he 
had effected nothing.^ Still the Pope's attitude underwent 

^ See Ricci's *letter to Farnese, June 1 5, 1 542 (Secret Archives of 
the Vatican) ; Lett, di Princ, XII., 334 seq. {cf. Pieper, 124). 

2 N. Sernini reported on July 24, 1542, on Ricci's mission (Gonzaga 
Archives, Mantua). 

3 On June 20, 1 542, Lattanzio Tolomei *wrote : To-day the Pope 
came back "et le prime parole che disse al Card, de Viseo [M. de 
Sylva], cheli ando incontro farono queste : Anco non h. rotta la guerra 
intra Francesi et 1' Imperatore" (State Archives, Siena). 

* Cf. L. Tolomei's *report of July 6, 1 542 (State Archives, Siena). 

' Legazioni di A. Serristori, 128. 

' L. Tolomei's *report of July 22, 1 542, who adds : " Ricci si mostra 
in cera molto allegro" (State Archives, Siena). Cf. RaynalDUS, 1542, 
n. 22 ; Pieper, 124. 

' L. Tolomei's *report of July 24, 1542 (State Archives, Siena). Cf 
Serristori's *letters of July 24 and 31, 1542 (State Archives, Florence). 


no change. He thought it too hazardous to declare openly 
against Francis I., since then the latter might apostatize. 
In that case, he represented to the Emperor, the French 
King would seize upon the property of the Church and 
then become a more powerful opponent of Spain than 
before.^ When on the 31st of July Ricci gave a report of 
his mission in consistory, Paul III. deplored with emotion 
the war between Francis and Charles, but no decision was 
reached.^ On August the 7th, with the consent of the 
whole Sacred College, the Pope appointed two of the most 
famous and most experienced Cardinals to be Legates 
for peace : Contarini was to go to the Emperor, Sadoleto 
to the King of France.^ The departure of the latter was 
prepared with such despatch that he was ready to start 
on the 17th.* Paul III. once more was now confident of 
a good result,' but the unexpected death of Contarini 
necessitated the appointment of a successor; the Pope 
first thought of Morone, but afterwards gave the Legation 

* See Cardinal Farnese's *Ietter to Poggio of Aug. 7, 1542 (Chigi 
Library, Rome, LI II., 65). 

2 See N. Sernini's *report to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. Rome, Aug. 
I, 1542, who adds: "S. S'* mostra haver ancor speranza di pace" 
(Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

^ That the appointment took place not on the 5th but on the 7th 
August, as Ehses (IV., 283) insists, is established by N. Sernini's *report 
of Aug. 7, 1542 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua), by that of *L. Tolomei of 
the same day (State Archives, Siena), and by the ^letter of Cardinal 
Farnese to Poggio of Aug. 7, 1542 (Chigi Library, Rome, LIII., 65). 

* See Farnese's ^letter of Aug. 19, 1542, in Appendix No. 17 (Chigi 
Library, Rome) ; cf. the ^letter of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. 
Rome, Aug. 11, 1542 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). The briefs which 
Sadoleto took with him are dated Aug. 17 (Raynaldus, 1542, n. 27, 
and *Min. brev. arm., 41, t. 25, n. 683 seq.\ ibid., n. 688: *Delph 
Franciae ; n. 689: *Reginae Navarrae ; n. 690: *Cancell. ; r, 692 
♦Card. Turonens. Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

* See L. Tolomei's *report, Aug. 1542 (Statt Archives, Siena). 


to the Portuguese Cardinal Miguel de Silva, who had 
eagerly solicited the post ; he had little idea, however, of 
the Emperor's mood.^ 

The strict neutrality to which the Pope saw himself 
driven in consequence of the French King's threats of 
apostasy ^ was unbearable to Charles V. Since Francis I., 
who was in alliance with the Turk, had been the aggressor, 
he was convinced that it was the Pope's duty to declare 
himself against him. In Paul III.'s role of mediator he 
saw the action of a partisan of his enemy. He was deeply 
wounded that the Bull of the Council in its exhortations 
to peace should speak of him, the champion of Christendom, 
in exactly the same tone in which it spoke of Francis, his 
deadly enemy, and in his estimation the sole destroyer of 

At first Charles fought against his agitation, so that it 
might not seem as if he wished to hinder the Council, and 
also advised his brother to take no offence at the phrase- 
ology of the BuU.^ But when the French declaration of 
war arrived soon after, his long-suppressed indignation at 
the Papal neutrality found vent with extreme violence. In 
his detailed reply to the Bull, dated from Monzon the 25th 
of August 1542, Charles bitterly complained that he was 
placed by the Pope on a level with Francis I. He had 
always been an obedient son to the Father of Christendom ; 
at incalculable cost, at the peril indeed of life itself, he had 
fought the Turks by sea and land ; he had used every re- 
source to suppress heresy in Germany, while the boundless 

* Cf. L. Tolomei's *report of Aug. 26, 1542 (State Archives, SienaX 
and that of N. Sernini of the same date in Appendix No. 18 (Gonzaga 
Archives, Mantua). The brief of credence for Sylva in Lanz, II., 
3^,7 seq. \ in Gavangos, VI., 2, n. 50, incorrectly dated. 

Cf. Serristori's *report of Aug. 4, 1542 (State Archives, Florence). 

^ See the letter of Aug. 11, 1542, in Korte, 59, 83. 


ambition of Francis I. had turned the sword of the infidel 
against the Christian, stiffened the obstinacy of the 
Protestants, put difficulties in the way of the Council and 
even now, under the flimsiest pretexts, had broken up the 
armistice concluded through Papal mediation. The ample 
statement of all his disputes with the French King had been 
interspersed by the Emperor with numerous hits at the 
Pope. At the very beginning, he says, Paul III. might take 
as an example the father in the Gospel, who indeed welcomes 
back the lost son, but still does not set him above the in- 
dustrious and obedient one. Then follows the complaint, 
which he, the Emperor, cannot refrain from uttering, that 
the whole College of Cardinals is subservient to the will 
of Francis I. in order to purchase an ostentatious profes- 
sion of faith. In conclusion, Charles V. observes without 
disguise that if the Pope rightly understood his duty he 
would make cause against Francis without reserve ; in this 
way alone can the Council be held and a possible remedy 
for the scandals of Christendom be found ; whether under 
other conditions the Council can be attended by the 
Estates of the Empire and the bishops of the Imperial 
States is a question which the Pope in his own wisdom 
must answer.^ 

On the 1 8th of September the Imperial ambassador 
handed this embittered letter of his master to the Pope, then 
in sojourn in Perugia ; the ambassador took the opportunity 
of again asking the Pope to take sides decisively against 
Francis I. But Paul III. still adhered now to what in 
former years he had once said to Granvelle, the Chancellor of 
Charles V.: "Neutrality in Rome, like our daily bread, must 
be regarded as a necessity." ^ This view was shared by the 

* In the Latin text in Ehses, IV., 238-245 ; cf. also Fallavicini, 
1. 5, c. I, n. I, 2 ; KORTE, 58 seqq, 

* Ehses, IV,, 245, n. i. 


Cardinals, with the exception, naturally, of the adherents of 
Francis I. and Charles V. Among the latter, Cardinal 
Dionisio Laurerio went so far as to demand that Francis 
should be deprived of the title of Most Christian King and 
that excommunication and war should be declared against 

What specially withheld the Pope from taking extreme 
measures against Francis I. was the total miscarriage of 
the ecclesiastical penalties passed on Henry VIII. To 
attempt now similar proceedings against the French King 
would, it appeared to him, be a downright act of folly, as 
he would thereby not only sever a member from the 
Christian body, but split Christendom itself into two 
portions.^ With regard to the Emperor's letter, Farnese 
told the nuncio Poggio on the 19th of September 1542 that 
an answer would be sent after the Pope's return to Rome ; 
at the same time, for the information of the nuncio, certain 
objections made by Charles to the composition of the Bull 
were refuted.^ 

In the meantime the more immediate preparations for 
the Council had begun. On the 2nd of June, in express 
anticipation of the coming Synod, the College of Cardinals 
was increased by seven new members, among whom was 
Morone.* In August a prelate and some other officials 
were sent to Trent,^ and on the i8th of September the Pope 
appointed Bishops Gian Matteo Giberti of Verona and 
Gian Tommaso Sanfelice of Cava as commissaries to 

^ For the discussions then held, see JoviUS, Hist., 1. 42. 

2 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 2, n. i. 

3 Ehses, IV., 247. 

* Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. i, n. 7 ; Farnese to Poggio, dat. June 4, 
1542 (Ehses, IV., 231 seq.\ and Vol. XI. of this work, p. 203 seqq. 

^ Farnese to the Cardinal of Trent, dat. Aug. 19, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 
238). In the consistory of August the nth the speech " De mittendis 
clericis ceremoniarum et foreriis ad locum concilii" {ibid..^ n. 4). 


superintend the further preparations.^ Of these two the 
latter only, who left on the 23rd of September ^ and reached 
Trent on the 5th of October,^ was in a position to meet 
the requirements of his task. That he did this actively 
and prudently his despatches to Farnese show. In 
consultation with the Bishop of Trent preparations, 
carefully considered and arranged, were made for the 
lodgment of the Cardinals, bishops, envoys, and theii 
suites, for a regular postal service, for the internal and 
external security of the city, for the security of the streets, 
and for the provisioning and commissariat.* Sanfelice, to 
his great dissatisfaction, had besides to encounter the doubts 
of the citizens of Trent whether the Curia was really in 
earnest about holding the Council, since up to the 25th 
of October not a word had been heard of the nomination 
of the conciliar Legates.^ 

» The brief in Ehses, IV., 246. 

2 Farnese to Sadoleto, dat. Sept. 25, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 246, n. l) ; 
cf. Pallavicini, I. 5, c. 4, n. i. On the i8th Sept. Orlando Ricci was 
also sent as a commissary to Trent to assist the Bishops of Cava and 
Trent in the preliminary labours. See his brief in Ehses, IV., 246. 

^ His report to Farnese of Oct. 6, 1542, in Ehses, IV., 251. 

* See the reports of the Bishop of Cava to Farnese of Oct. 6, 1542 
(Ehses, IV., 251 seq^y Oct. 9 {ibid.^ 252-254), Oct. 13 {ibid., 254-259, 
with the supplement " Consultatio," dat. 13 Octobris 1542), Oct. 19 
{ibid.y 264-266), Oct. 25 {ibid.y 266 seq.\ Nov. 4 {ibid.^ 278 seq.\ 
Nov. 10 {ibid., 280), Nov. 15 {ibid., 284), Nov. 30 {ibid., 290), Dec. 6 
and 9 {ibid., 291), Dec. 15 and 22 {ibid., 293) ; also Farnese's answers 
of Oct. 20 {ibid., 266), Oct. 28 {ibid., 275) Nov. i {ibid., 276), and 
Farnese's letter to the conciliar Legates of Dec. 2 {ibid., 290). 
Cf. KORTE, 62 seq., who expresses the view that " notwithstanding all 
these preparations it may well be doubted whether the Curia really 
thought seriously of holding the Council." 

^ Cf. his letter to Farnese of Oct. 25 begging the Cardinal to 
forward him frequent instructions concerning the Council so that he 
may have his letters to appeal to in order to silence doubts, Farnese. 
in his reply on Nov. i, assured him of the Pope's firm determination. 


On the i6th of October 1542 the Pope nominated, 
after prolonged consultation, the three conciliar Legates.* 
They were Cardinals of distinction : Parisio, Morone, and 
Pole.^ Three days later they received the Legatine cross,^ 
Their instructions were, at the command of Paul III., drawn 
up by the Cardinals Giovanni Maria del Monte, Barto- 
lommeo Guidiccioni, and the Bishop of Feltre, Tommaso 
Campeggio; they bear the date the 26th of October, 1542.* 
Pole left Rome for Trent on the 26th of October, and 
Morone and Parisio on the 27th and 28th.^ The delay 
in their journey was apologized for by Farnese in a letter 
of October 28th to the Bishop of Cava^ in which the 
latter and the Bishop of Trent were commissioned to 
receive the prelates on their arrival until the coming of 
the Legates. On the 30th of October the Pope renewed 
the decree of the 29th of May 1536 on the Papal election 
in case such an emergency should arise during the Council/ 

Sanfelice thanked him on Nov. 10 for this letter, which enabled him 
to meet the doubters with greater confidence. 

* Cf. N. Sernini's *report of Oct. 14, 1542, in Appendix No. 19 
(Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

2 See *report of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. Rome, Oct. 
17, 1542 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). The Bull of appointment of the 
same day in Ehses, IV , 261 seqq. 

^ Farnese to Sanfelice, dat. Oct. 20, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 266) ; Farnese 
to Poggio, dat. Nov. 3, 1 542 ; EHSES (IV., 277) gives the date as Oct. 20 ; 
also Pallavicini (1. 5, c. 4, n. i). 

* In Ehses, IV., 267-275. For Guidiccioni's memorial and his 
previous labours in other ways on behalf of the Council on which the 
memorial is based, cf. Schweitzer, Guidiccioni, 190-194. 

^ Massarelli, Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 418; cf. Ehses, IV., 
261, n. 2. 

Ehses, IV., 275 seq. 

7 *Report of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. Rome, Nov. 2, 
1542 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua) ; Ehses, IV., 268, n. 1 ; Pallavicini, 
1. 5, c. I, n. 8. 


Immediately after the appointment of the Legates the 
remaining requisite steps for the approaching opening 
of the Council were taken. In briefs of October the i6th 
those foreign Bishops whose previous summonses to Rome 
in view of the Council had not been followed by any 
result, were again urgently addressed by the Pope.^ On 
November the 3rd Farnese directed the nuncio Poggio^ to 
intimate to the Emperor the nomination and departure 
of the Legates, and to beg him to send the prelates of his 
States to the Council. The invitation to the Spanish 
Bishops was entrusted to the Portuguese Cardinal de Silva 
of Viseu, who had succeeded Contarini, on the death of 
the latter, as Legate to the Emperor.^ Sadoleto, who had 
been sent in the interests of peace as Legate to France, 
tried to get Francis to look favourably on the Council ; he 
was unable, however, to move the King from his stiff 
attitude of refusal. His interposition on behalf of peace 
was equally unsuccessful.^ 

Cardinal de Silva fared still worse. In disgrace with his 
own King, he received from the Emperor, who had come 
to terms of friendship with the Portuguese monarch, the 
worst reception. The mission of the Legate was still 
more objectionable than his person, and he determined 
simply to dismiss him ; on the 8th of October he com- 
municated to the Pope his intention. The letter is full 
of dry remarks on the Pope's mediation for peace which 
had only made Francis I. more daring ; as his Holiness 
was the originator of the armistice, it was his duty to 
avenge its violation ; the longer sojourn of the Legate 
was purposeless, negotiations with him were superfluous, as 

^ The brief to the Cardinal of Lorraine in Ehses, IV., 262 ; cf. also 
ibid., 277, n. 4. 

* Ibid., 276 seq. ^ Ibid., 283, n. 2. 

* See PlEPER, 124 ; Ehses, IV., 283. 


they only afforded the French King fresh opportunities of 
exercising deception.^ 

After this very clear declaration no other course re- 
mained to the Pope but to recall the Legate ; which he 
did on the 2nd of November. The Pope now resolved to 
try once more the experiment which had been successful 
in 1538. After long discussion in consistory- it was 
decided on the loth of November to address an almost 
identically expressed brief to both sovereigns with the 
proposal that, for the sake of negotiations on the subject 
of the peace which the Turkish danger made so necessary, 
they should meet the Pope personally in Lombardy. The 
Pope, in making this proposal, dwelt on the great duty which 
his office imposed upon him of never failing to exercise 
the authority of the father as well as of the judge.^ 

The date fixed for the opening of the Council had in the 
meantime been exceeded by three weeks when the Legates 
made their solemn entry into Trent* This proceedingseems 
at first to have evoked favourable and hopeful impressions. 
Hitherto, as Robert Wauchope had found in September, 
public opinion in Germany had been tepid and inactive,^ 

* Lanz, II., 378 (with wrong date); cf. Gayangos, VI., 2, n, 65 ; 
Ehses, IV., 264, n. I, 283, n. i. 

* See Acta Consist, in Ehses, IV., 247, n. i, 287, n. 5, and *report 
of N. Sernini to Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. Rome, Nov. 7, 1542, dealing 
specially with the Turkish war. The latter was also discussed in 
consistory on Nov. 24 (see *report of N. Sernini of Nov. 25, 1542, 
Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

* See *Acta Consist, for Nov. 10, 1542 (Consistorial Archives, 
Vatican) ; cf. Raynaldus, 1542, n. 31 seq. ; Ehses, IV., 287, n. 5. 

* The Bishop of Cava to Farnese, dat. Nov. 23, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 
285). The three Legates to Farnese, Nov. 24, 1542 {ibid.^ 286 seq.). 
PallaviCINI (1. 5, c. 4, n. i) gives Nov. 22 as the day of their arriva' 
in Trent. 

' Wauchope to Cardinal Cervini from Salzburg, dat. Oct. i, 1542 
(Ehses, IV.,'250). 


those who were well disposed towards the Council were 
shy of expressing themselves, while those who declared 
themselves ready to attend the Council in person were 
determined to wait until the Pope had begun his journey 
to Trent; among these were the Bishop of Ratisbon and 
the Archbishop of Salzburg, who promised that he would 
then appear with his provincial bishops. On the 13th of 
November came the Cathedral Dean of Salzburg, Ambrosius 
von Lamberg, to inform himself of the position of things 
in Trent.^ 

The three Legates, on their arrival in Trent, sent to 
Farnese^ a list, which has not been preserved, of the 
German bishops who sent envoys to the Council with the 
promise to attend themselves or by representatives ; they 
thought that they had grounds for hoping that now that 
their coming was an established fact that an increasingly 
great number would attend. Less optimistic was Gian 
Tommaso Sanfelice, Bishop of Cava, who wrote to Farnese ^ 
on the 30th of November: " As yet no one has come; we 
must at least, this once, take care that Italian prelates 
appear, especially such as belong to the Curia." In 
Sanfelice's letters of December the 6th and 9th* the same 
view is expressed concerning the participation of the 
German bishops, and he calls attention to the fact that 
the forthcoming Diet at Nuremberg would decide whether 
the Germans generally would attend the Council or not. 
On December the 17th Sanfelice urged again ^ that the 
Italian bishops must put in an appearance first. The Arch- 
bishop of Salzburg certainly wrote a letter on the 28th of 

* Sanfelice to Farnese, dat. Nov. 15, 1542 (Ehses, IV., 284). 
2 Nov. 24, 1542 (ibid.^ 287). 

^ Ibid., 290. 

* Ibid.^ 293. 
' Ibid.y 291. 


November to Morone ^ in which he declared that, since he 
had been informed of the Legates' arrival, he was now 
ready, together with his provincial bishops, to come to 
Trent as soon as he heard that the Council would pursue its 
course. He also instructed the Dean of his Chapter to tell 
Morone, on the delivery of his letter,^ that he would appear 
in person with eight of his suffragans within eight days if 
he heard that as many prelates from Italy and other 
countries had arrived as would secure the constitution of the 
Council. The Dean thought, moreover, that all the other 
German prelates would follow as soon as the participation 
of the other nations became known and the certainty of a 
General Council thus secured ; he also declared that it was 
taken for certain in Germany that King Ferdinand would 
go to Trent at the close of the Diet. On the 14th of 
December came from Ferdinand himself the message to 
the Bishop of Trent ^ bidding him express to the Legates 
the King's delight at the beginning of the Council and to 
keep in view the early arrival of his envoy; his own 
absence he excused on account of the Diet, but intended 
when that was over to go to Innsbruck in order to be able, 
in case of necessity, to reach Trent without difficulty. 

Charles V. had nominated, on the i8th of October, the 
Chancellor Granvelle,his son Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle, 
Bishop of Arras, the Marquis de Aguilar, and his am- 
bassador at Venice, Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, to be 
his orators at the Council.* Granvelle, however, did not 

* Ehses, IV., 287 seq. 

2 The Legates to Farnese, Dec. 11-15, 1542 {ibid., 292). 
' Cf. the letters of the Bishop of Cava of Dec. 15, and of the Legates 
of 22nd, 1542, to Farnese, in Ehses, IV., 293, and n. 3. 

* Mandatum Caroli V., dat. Barcinone, 18 Octobris 1542 (Ehses, 
IV., 263 seq^j. For their entrance into Trent, cf. ibid., 297, 298 ; 
Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 1-19 ; Korte, 64-68. 


leave Spain before December. On his arrival in Italy 
he not only avoided paying a previous visit to the Pope, 
but his intention of going to Trent was also carefully 
kept a secret from Paul III. when Granvelle's younger son 
Thomas de Chantonnay and the Imperial ambassador 
Aguilar had an audience of him on December the 24th. 
For the sake of complete secrecy it was also arranged 
that Aguilar should remain in Rome and not take a part 
in the embassy.^ 

The Florentine secretary Lorenzo Pagni, who accom- 
panied Granvelle into Italy, was certainly of opinion, as 
he reported to his sovereign the Duke from Piacenza 
on the 28th of December,^ that the Imperial Chancellor 
was going to Trent with the intention of bringing about an 
adjournment of the Council. In any case, the Imperial 
diplomacy was directed towards leaving the Pope and the 
conciliar Legates entirely in the dark as to the intended 
mission and its object; the latter were to be entirely un- 
prepared and taken by surprise, a manoeuvre which in the 
event proved completely successful. 

The arrival of Granvelle and his companions at Trent 
took place on the 7th or 8th of January 1543.^ They 
at once visited the Legates. During the proceedings on 
the following day * Granvelle requested a public audience 
for the orators in the Cathedral in which they could tender 
excuses for the Emperor's absence and the delay in the 
despatch of his orators, then publicly notify their appear- 
ance and receive an official acknowledgment that this 

* Cf. Ehses, IV., 297, n. I. 

2 Ibid. 

3 Ehses (IV., 297 n. 2) takes Jan. 7 as the correct date of arrival, 
although the reports say Jan. 8. 

* See the Legates' report to Farnese of Jan. 9, 1543, in Ehses, IV^ 


had taken place. The Legates did not comply with this 
demand ; the precedents of former Councils must not be 
departed from, for before the Council had been solemnly 
opened, after previous fasting and prayer, it did not appear 
to be becoming to proceed to any public act ; the pre- 
sentation of the mandates had always taken place after 
the inauguration in the congregations. But if they wished 
a certificate from the Legates of their appearance and 
the presentation of the mandates, they were ready to give 
them one. Granvelle replied with warmth that the re- 
fusal of a public audience was an affront to the Emperor ; 
he threatened, if the Legates persisted therein, to put 
forward a plea of nullity against the Council and to have 
the same affixed to the doors of the Cathedral. The 
Legates stood firm ; it was not in their power to grant an 
audience in the Cathedral ; an understanding, however, was 
arrived at by an assurance that the orators should be 
heard in the house of Cardinal Parisio. Here they appeared 
with a retinue on the 9th of January.^ 

The Bishop of Arras made a speech in which he first 
spoke of the necessity of a Council and of the Emperor's 
persistent zeal in its behalf, now once more manifested 
in the despatch of his orators, whose presence in his 
name would be an effectual help to the carrying out of 
the Council. If Charles V. was unable to be present 
himself, he had an adequate excuse in the preoccupa- 
tions of war which prevented him leaving his dominions ; 
their own late arrival also was caused by the danger and 
insecurity of the journey and the existing condition of 
affairs ; the bishops in the same way had been hindered 

' See the notarial documents ; " Comparitio oratorium Caroli V 
Imperatoris coram legatis Apostolicis. Oratio habita ab Antonio 
Perenoto, episcopo Atrebatensi. Tridenti 9 Januarii 1543 " (Ehses, IV., 


from coming up to the present time by this very in- 
security ; they promised, however, in the Emperor's name, 
that he would himself appear later, unless he was hindered, 
contrary to his wishes, in the case of his presence being of 
use to the Council, and 'that he would send his bishops as 
soon as they could undertake the journey. They were 
now here themselves with full powers to assist the Council 
in every way. After this discourse the Emperor's mandate 
was read out and then, at Granvelle's request, a notarial 
deed was drawn up registering the whole proceeding. At 
the close of this public transaction the orators again 
assured the Legates, but not in the presence of witnesses, of 
their best wishes, but on the following day, January the loth, 
Granvelle informed the Legates individually that he was 
obliged to return to Nuremberg to the Diet.^ Accordingly, 
on January the i ith he left Trent, together with his son. 

The whole manner of his arrival, combined with his 
departure for Germany, filled the Legates with justifiable 
suspicion. They surmised - that Granvelle had come to 
Trent only in order to ascertain that the Council had not 
yet begun ; they were also in anxiety lest the Imperial 
diplomacy, as soon as the eighteen months fixed by the 
Recess of Ratisbon had expired, should pursue the object, 
at the Diet of Nuremberg, either of deciding on a national 
council or of yielding to the demands of the Protestants in 
order to secure their aid against the Turks. To meet this 
danger it was represented to the Pope by the Legates that 
he ought not now to delay in inducing the bishops to betake 

^ " Sommario del ragionamento havuto da Monsgr. di Granvella col. 
card. Morono alii lo da gennario 1543 in Trento" (Ehses, IV., 304 
seq). " Ex ejusdem Granvellae colloquiis cum Parisio et Polo 
cardinalibus habitis Tridenti 10 Januarii 1543" {ibid., 305 seg.). 

2 The Legates to Farnese, dat. 1543, Jan. 12 {ibid., 306-308; cf. 

297, n. i). 



themselves to Trent to enable the Council to be held ; he 
ought also to send someone from Rome to Nuremberg to 
make, simultaneously with the nuncio Verallo, the neces- 
sary representations to King Ferdinand and Granvelle, 
in order to turn them from their ruinous schemes, since the 
whole question of religion and reformation must be reserved 
to the Council. Notwithstanding the promises and the 
decisive protests made by the Legates, Mendoza, who had 
remained behind temporarily in Trent, also returned on 
January the 17th to his post as ambassador to Venice.^ 

Orders were at once given from Rome corresponding to 
the Legates' admonitions. In his answer to the letter of 
the 9th of January 1543 Farnese had informed them on the 
20th 2 that the Pope had given orders that steps should be 
taken to secure the presence at Trent of an appreciable 
number of Italian bishops. Cardinal Cervini was com- 
missioned on January the iQth,^ and again, on the receipt 
of the fuller reports, on the 22nd,* to inform the Italian 
bishops appointed for that purpose that they must hold 
themselves in readiness for their journey. On the 29th of 
January the Pope, in addition to his preparations for the 
journey to Bologna, had been specially occupied with 
urgent reminders to the Italian and other bishops of their 
journey to Trent. To a great number of prelates present in 
Rome, wrote Farnese on the 14th of February to the nuncio 
Poggio,^ the orders for departure have been sent, while others 
are every day holding themselves in readiness to start. 

Corresponding measures were taken with regard to the 
remaining bishops in and out of Italy. The nuncio Poggio 

1 The Legates to Farnese, dat. Jan. 17, 1543 {ibid., 308). 

2 Ibid., 300, n. I. 

3 Cf. ibid., 309, n. 2. 

* Farnese to Cervini, dat. Jan. 22, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 308 seq). 
6 Ihid., 309-311. 


was at the same time instructed to urge upon the Emperor 
to send without delay the bishops of all his territories and 
to exhort the King of Portugal to do the same.^ To King 
Sigismund I. of Poland, on the i8th of February, a briefs 
was sent. The Pope thanked him for his reply, sent by 
Otto von Truchsess, and prayed him to send off his orators 
and the prelates of his kingdom. On February the 25th 
orders were sent to the Sardinian metropolitans and their 
suffragans to repair with the abbots and other prelates of 
their dioceses to the Council without delay ; similar in- 
structions were sent to many other prelates as, on the 5th 
of March, to the Bishops of Sitten and Chur and the 
Abbots of St. Gall and St Urban.^ 

To the Diet at Nuremberg Otto von Truchsess was sent 
as in former years. He brought with him a brief addressed 
to King Ferdinand and the archbishops, bishops, and 
princes* assembled in the Diet, drawn up on the i8th of 
February 1543, complaining of the neglect of the invitation 
to the Council shown by the bishops of Germany up to 
that time. The object of Otto's mission was described to 
be the enforcement of this invitation with the co-opera- 
tion of Verallo.^ Truchsess left Rome on the 26th of 
February;^ in accordance with his instructions,'^ he was 
first to visit Trent to transmit orders to the Legates and 
to receive from them advice regarding his mission to 

^ On March 13 and again on April 6 Poggio was again commissioned 
to urge the appearance of the Spanish prelates {ibid., 316). 

2 Jbid., 312, 316, n. 4. 

3 Ibid., 314, n. 7,315- 
* Ibid., 311 seq. 

° Cf. ibid., 312; ibid., 313 seq., a letter of an unidentified corre- 
spondent to Granvelle of Feb. 21, 1543, in which the latter is begged 
to prevent resolutions in the Diet which might put hindrances in the 
way of the Council. 

" Ibid., 311, n. 3. ' Uat. Spoleto, March 4 {ibid., y,t\ 


Germany. On his arrival in Nuremberg he w^as, if King 
Ferdinand, Granvelle, and the nuncio were there, to seek 
out the latter first and go with him to the King to lay- 
before him the object of his mission and convey to 
him information about the Pope's journey to Bologna ; 
his instructions for Granvelle were similar. If, however, 
Ferdinand and the nuncio had already started for 
Bohemia, he was to give his information to Granvelle and 
then follow up the King and Verallo, returning to the 
Diet from there, if the nuncio thought good, on the 
accomplishment of his instructions. Truchsess reached 
Trent on March the 12th and continued his journey on 
the 15th, after transacting his business with the Legates.^ 
They gave him, further, a letter for Verallo ^ which, while 
referring him for the most part to Truchsess's verbal 
communications, contained special injunctions to do every- 
thing in combination with him that could check dangerous 
resolutions in the Diet. 

Truchsess who, on his onward journey from Augsburg 
had transacted business with Duke William of Bavaria 
and received in Eichstatt the solemn promise of Bishop 
Moritz von Hutten to attend the Council at Trent, 
reached Nuremberg on the 22nd of March.^ In accord- 
ance with his instructions he had an interivew with King 
Ferdinand on Holy Saturday, in the presence of the 
nuncio; the King gave him benevolent assurances of the 
presence of the German bishops at the Council. He then 
saw Granvelle, who complained with emotion of the dis- 
trust felt towards him in Rome, but finally also promised 
his assistance in the matter of the Council. On March 

1 The Legates to Farnese, dat. March 15, 1543 {ibid., 317 seq.\ 

2 Dat. March 14, 1543 {ibid.., 316 seq>). 

3 Truchsess to Farnese from Nuremberg, dat. March 31, 1543 {}bid.^ 


the 26th Truchsess went to see the Bishop of Augsburg, 
Christoph von Stadion, who enlarged on the necessity 
for the Council and the dangerous condition of Germany, 
and likewise declared his readiness to give support.^ 
On April the 6th Truchsess reported again ^ that he had 
sent the briefs addressed to princes who were absent 
from Nuremberg through their envoys ; the archbishops 
he intended to visit personally. Truchsess at this time 
was full of hope for his mission and that after the Diet 
was over the Catholics would go to Trent without delay, 
as so many had already determined to do: thus the 
Cardinal of Mayence had already given orders to that 
effect to the Bishop of Hildesheim, to his own coadjutor, 
and to two theologians.^ 

On the whole, however, the Catholics confined themselves 
to fine words and empty promises, since King Ferdinand, 
notwithstanding his ostensible goodwill, was implicated 
in his brother's policy. The Bishop of Vienna, Nausea, 
whose enthusiasm for the Council had led him repeatedly 
to ask the Pope to call him to his side, since it was in his 
power to give him important information, could only on 
receipt of the brief of February the i8th send a letter of 
excuse to Paul III.* to say that on account of express 

' The full account in his letter above mentioned of March 31 {ibid.^ 

2 Ibid.^ 325, n. 6. 

8 Further reports from Truchsess, who soon afterwards, on the 
death of Christoph von Stadion (April 15), was chosen Bishop of 
Augsburg on May 10, do not appear to be forthcoming (EhSES, IV., 
326, n.). The Bishop of Hildesheim, Valentine von Teutleben, came 
to Trent after the Diet, but not with the Archbishop of Mayence, but 
with his suffragan (see i7ifra, p. 167). 

* Dat. Vienna, April 25, 1543 (EhseS, IV., 326 seq). For his 
subsequent summons to the Pope and his journey to the latter at 
Parma, see infra., p. 174, 


counter-orders from the King he was obliged to abandon 
his departure for Trent; his immediate journey must be 
put off, but he hoped as soon as possible to attend the 
Council and to pay a visit beforehand to the Pope. On 
the other hand, the apprehensions aroused by the Diet in 
the Catholic party were not fulfilled. The Protestants 
certainly, as Verallo wrote to Farnese on the I2th of April,^ 
were not backward in trying, if possible, to bring Charles 
to summon a national council ; but no conclusion was 
reached on the further treatment of the religious question, 
nor was the question itself discussed in the Diet. Granvelle 
on his return to Trent from Nuremberg took to himself 
the credit for this.^ The Protestants on this occasion had 
to be content with another protest against the Council.^ 
The danger of a national council was not removed in this 
way ; it was only pushed somewhat into the background. 

One by one and at long intervals a few bishops arrived 
at Trent; they were Italians, for the most part, attached to 
the Curia, and a few Germans. On Granvelle's first arrival 
in Trent, besides the Bishop of Cava, Bishop Richard 
Pate of Worcester had already arrived and was a witness 
of the proceedings on the 9th of January.* On March 
the 10th came Tommaso Campeggio, Bishop of Feltre,^ 
and on the nth Cornelio Mussi, Bishop of Bertinoro; 

' Ehses, IV., 317, n. I. 

2 Cf. Morone's report to Farnese of May 26, 1543 {ibid.^ 335 seq^. 

8 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 17 ; Ehses, IV., 336, n. 2. 

* Ehses, IV., 303. 

6 T. Campeggio to Farnese, dat. March 15, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 318) ; 
the Legates to Farnese, dat. March 15, 1543 {ibid); the Legates to 
the nuncio Verallo, dat. March 14, 1543 {ibid., 316). Campeggio 
immediately on his arrival had been struck by the unsuitableness of 
Trent for the Council on account of the scarcity of accommodation and 
lack of means for keeping up its provisionment. In his letter of 
March 15 he gave his opinion that the Council ought only to be 


on the 20th of March they were followed by the Arch- 
bishop of Corfu, Giacomo Cauco, and Bishop Giacomo 
Giacomello of Belcastro.^ On the 28th of March the 
procurators of three German prelates presented their 
mandates,^ and on April the 4th the Legates ^ mentioned 
the presence of the Archbishop of Otranto, Pietro Antonio 
da Capua. The good feeling and zeal of the prelates who 
up to April 15th had appeared on the scene is praised in a 
letter of the Bishop of Trent to Farnese on the 30th of 
April ^ from Brixen, the former having come to that city 
a fortnight before. About this time also the Bishop of 
Chironia (Cheronaea), Dionigi Zannettini, was at Trent.^ 
On the loth of May arrived the Bishop of Hildesheim, 
Valentine von Teutleben, and his coadjutor Balthasar 
Waneman ; the two bishops, who were accompanied by the 
jurist Dr. Conrad Braun, came together in the name of the 
Cardinal of Mayence.^ The Bishop of Hildesheim made 
special excuses in a letter to the Pope for the absence of 
Albert/ laid stress on the necessity for a Council, and 
made strong representations that everything should be 
done to avert the threatened national council and to 
obtain from the Emperor in the meantime the revocation 
and cancellation of that consent to the Recess of Ratisbon 

opened formally and then without delay transferred elsewhere or, 
better still, not be opened at all but at once relegated to some other 
locality. The Legates also on March 28 called attention to the in- 
conveniences of provisionment : to Farnese (ibid., 319). 
^ The Legates on March 10 to Farnese {ibid.). 

2 The same on March 29 to same {ibid.). 

3 To Farnese {ibid.., 328, n. 3). 
* Ibid.., 327 seq, 

^ Ibid.., 328, n. 6. 

^ Parisio and Morone to Farnese {ibid.., 329). 

" Cf. the letter to Farnese of May 20, 1 543 {ibid., 330 seq.). Ehses 
could not find the letter of May 16 to the Pope himself. 


which the Protestants had wrung from him under 
pressure. The Bishop of Wiirzburg, Conrad von Bibra, 
since he could not attend in person, appointed on the 
1st of June as his representatives the Bishops of Eichstatt 
and Hildesheim.^ The former of the two, Moritz von 
Hutten, came to Trent at the end of June and went thence 
to visit the Pope at Bologna.^ The hope that after the 
close of the Diet a still greater number of German bishops 
would arrive proved deceptive. In consonance with the 
policy of Charles V., the Spanish bishops who appeared 
were as few in number^ as the French, the latter being 
forbidden to travel by Francis I> The further time 
advanced the more nugatory seemed the prospect of the 
opening of the Council. 

1 His letter to the Pope of June i, 1543 {ibid.^ 342). 

2 Morone to Farnese, dat. June 30, 1543 {ibid.^ 346; cf. 342, n. 4). 
In the beginning of July representatives of the Elector of Treves came 
to Trent {ibid., 352, n. 3). 

3 Some Spanish Bishops came to Italy in the Emperor's suite on his 
visit to the Pope, but not before (see infra, p. 180). 

* On Feb. 20 or 21 the ambassador of Francis I., de Siney, came 
to Rome. He brought with him the King's refusal to take part in the 
proposed meeting, and at the same time informed the Pope that neither 
the French King nor his prelates would appear at the Council 
(Ehses, IV., 310, n. 1,314; cf. also 337 seq., n. 5). 


The Meeting between Paul III. and Charles V, at 
BussETo. — Suspension of the Council. — The Pope's Neu- 
trality AND Exertions for Peace. — Misunderstandings 
WITH THE Emperor. 

Paul III. had left Rome on the 26th of February 1543 
for Bologna, partly on account of his endeavours to secure 
peace and partly that he might be nearer to Trent. His 
journey was opposed by many in Rome, where the worst 
reports were in circulation ^ as to the Emperor's intentions. 
Nevertheless, the Pope set out; he did not listen to 
the complaints of the Romans, the representations of the 
Cardinals, and the prayers of his relations, who brought 
before the aged man the dangers of a journey at such an 
unfavourable season of the year. Cardinal Carpi again 
remained behind as Legate. To the General of the troops, 
Alessandro Vitelli, was committed the safe custody of the 
castle of St. Angelo.^ Paul III. entered Bologna on the 
17th of March ;2 in order to personally acquaint himself 

' See the letter to Granvelle of Feb. 21, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 313). 

2 See JOVIUS, Hist, I., 43, and Ehses, IV., 316, n. 7. 

^ See Gualterius, *Diarium (Secret Archives of the Vatican, Miscell. 
Arm., 12, t. 58, f. 368''). According to this source the Pope left Bologna 
on April 2 for Modena, from thence to Parma (April 5 and 6) ; on 8th 
he reached Piacenza, returned to Parma on the 15th, remained there 
until 19th, and then went to Ferrara, where he made his state entry on 
April 22. (For his stay there and the objects thereby obtained, see 
Fontana, II., 177 seq.^ and Rodocanachi, Renee de France, 160 



with the state of things in Trent and to be better informed 
as to the views of the Legates, he summoned Cardinal Pole 
to him on the 3rd of Ma.y} Pole started on the sth.^ A 
discussion was held in consistory on the nth of May 
whether, under existing circumstances, affairs at Trent 
should be allowed to drift or the Council be postponed to 
a more favourable time. The prevailing view among the 
Cardinals was that the Pope's efforts hitherto had been 
more than sufficient to prove his zeal. If the experiment 
of the Council were persisted in much longer, the only 
result would be to make the disobedience of the Catholics 
appear all the more culpable and inconsiderate and in- 
creasingly to diminish the respect for Papal authority 
among the party of error. It would therefore be the 
lesser evil to dissolve the assembly now with a promise 
of resumption at a time when the members of the Christian 
body seemed better disposed thereto.^ The Pope, however, 
was unwilling to make a decision until he had personally 
conferred with the Emperor, who on May the 1st had 
embarked at Barcelona for Italy. On the 13th or 14th of 
May, Parisio was also summoned to Bologna.* In Trent 
the sudden departure of the two Legates, the object of 

seqq.') On April 25 the Pope returned to Bologna, whither on April 27 
Capodiferro came from France; on May 12 Dandino was despatched 
to France {cf. Pieper, 126). 

^ Farnese to Pole from Bologna, dat. May 3, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 

2 Parisio and Morone to Farnese, dat. May 6, 1543 {ibid., 329). 

3 Thus Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 19, who is mistaken, however, in 
stating that Parisio had already been summoned to Bologna before 
Pole. The extract from the Consistorial Acta of May 11 in Ehses 
(IV., 329, n. 2) gives only the names of the eight Cardinals named 
deputies in the affair of the Council in this consistory. 

* Parisio and Morone to Farnese, dat. May 16, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 
330 ; c/". n. I for the date). 


which was a matter of mere surmise, produced a dispiriting 
impression. The assembled prelates felt that their last 
hope of meeting in Council had slipped from them.^ 

On the 26th of May Granvelle, with the Bishop of Arras 
and his two other sons, arrived at Trent on his return from 
Nuremberg.2 In discussing the question of the Council 
with Morone, who was the only Legate left in Trent, he 
regretted that the two others had been called away, since 
when this became known in Germany the Council would 
be regarded with general incredulity, the Protestants would 
become bolder tha« ever, and the Catholics correspondingly 
depressed. If it were the Pope's intention to dissolve the 
Council, then it would be fitting that he should first consult 
the Emperor and the King and even himself as to the 
manner and way of doing so. Morone replied that he 
was not aware that Paul III. had summoned to him his 
colleagues for the purpose of dissolving the Council. He 
thought it much more likely that he wished to take their 
advice as to what ought to be the next matter for negotiation 
with the Emperor. For the rest, no decision had been 
taken whether the Council was to go on or be suspended ; 
if the Pope had already resolved on the latter course, he 
would not have allowed Morone himself and the other prelates 
to remain longer in Trent. He was also certain that the 
two Legates would return. If the Emperor came to Italy 
and had a meeting with Paul III., it would only be reason- 
able that the question of the Council should be dealt with 

^ Cf. letter from Tommaso Campeggio to Cardinal Cervini of May 
21, 1543 (EhSES, IV., 331 seqq.). The two Hildesheimer bishops 
repeated to Campeggio their expressions of anxiety lest the failure to 
hold the General Council would be followed, in accordance with the 
Recess of Ratisbon, by a national council (Ehses, IV., 332 seq.). 

2 See Morone's full reports to Farnese on May 26 and 28, 1 543, of 
his negotiations with Granvelle (EhSES, IV., 335-342). Cf. KORIE. 
68 seq. 


and settled between them ; but it was no matter of surprise 
if the Pope wished also to confer with two of his Legates 
beforehand. As his own opinion, which, as he observed, 
he had not imparted to the Emperor or the King, Granvelle 
gave it to be understood that the Council ought not now 
to be actually opened and held, or dissolved, but allowed 
to remain in its present unsettled condition ; so that an 
Imperial army in Germany might find in it precisely the 
kind of weapon with which to curb the Lutherans, while 
on the other side it would bring moral support to the 
Catholics and the wavering.^ 

Charles V. had landed at Savona on May the 24th and 
then gone on to Genoa,^ where he found Pier Luigi Farnese 
sent by the Pope to invite him to a conference at Bologna. 
The Emperor, who was little inclined for peace negotiations 
for their own sake and was in haste to reach Germany, 
declined the invitation, but on the other hand showed him- 
self willing to meet the Pope at some spot convenient to 
himself, such as Parma or Mantua.^ Charles V. adhered 
to this even when Cardinal Farnese proposed a town not 
far from Bologna; he could not go so far out of his route. 
It was believed by many that the Emperor, out of con- 
sideration for Henry VIII., with whom to the general 
astonishment he had concluded on February the nth, 1543, 
an offensive alliance against Francis I., wished to create 
the appearance of being forced reluctantly into a meeting 
with the Pope.* 

i Ehses, IV., 337-341. 

2 On this journey Charles V. dictated the famous instructions for his 
son (see Gachard, Biogr. nat., III., 666). 

* Gayangos, VI., 2, n. 153. 

* JOVIUS, Hist., I., 43, confirmed by Gayangos, VI., 2, p. 400 seq. ; 
for the alliance with Henry VIII., which was at first to be kept secret, 
see State Papers, IX., 355, n. 2 ; Rymer, XIV., 768 seq. ; Ehses, IV., 
338, n. I ; Brosch, VI., 359 seq. ; Gachard, loc. cti., 663. 


Farnese arrived at Bologna with the Emperor's answer 
on June the 8th, just in time to take part in the consistory 
held on that day. The views of the Cardinals were divided ; 
not a few were of opinion that the aged Pope should not 
risk his health by any greater excitement nor expose the 
majesty of his office to any further humiliation. Sadoleto, 
however, interposed in a contrary sense ; as regarded the 
question of health he imparted their decision, as a matter 
of course, privately to the Pope ; as far as the Papal office 
was concerned none other existed — for the servants of the 
Church — to the care of which the salvation of Christendom 
could be committed. Nor could there be any doubt that 
the conclusion of peace might be awaited with greater 
certainty if the Pope appeared personally as a mediator. 
Besides, the contemplated meeting would also be of service 
in dissipating the rumours of a serious quarrel between the 
two sovereign heads of Christendom. The Pope yielded 
to this advice, and the consistory agreed unanimously that 
the conference should be held at Parma or in some other 
conveniently situated place.^ 

The Pope accordingly left Bologna on June the i ith and 
reached Parma on the I5th,2 where he found the Marquis 
del Vasto with an autograph letter from Charles. Great 
difficulties were caused at the last moment by the Emperor's 
intention of appearing with a large military force. The 
Papal party remembered then full well the claims of the 
Emperor on Parma, raised in his letter of complaint to 
Clement VII. In order to obviate all grounds of danger, 
it was agreed on the 17th of June that the meeting should 
take place inBusseto,a small town belongingto the Marchese 

* Together with the very laconic entries in Acta Consist. (Ehses, 
IV., 344, n. i), see Sadoleto, Opera, II., 210 seq. 

2 Cf. Lett. ined. di C. Gualteruzzi di Fano, Pesaro, 1834, 47; 
GUALANO, 65 seq. 


Pallavicini ; both parties were to be accompanied by an 
equal number of retainers. A consistory on tiie i8th of 
June approved of this arrangement, whereupon Cardinals 
Parisio and Cervini were appointed Legates to the Emperor.^ 

In Parma Paul III. received the Bishop of Vienna, 
Frederick Nausea, who, as he had repeatedly asked per- 
mission to do, communicated his views to the Pope and 
handed him the manuscript of his Sylvcs Synodales? 

Paul III. reached Busseto with fourteen Cardinals on June 
the 2 1st. They remained there till the evening of the 25th 
of June, when the Pope returned to Parma and the Emperor 
went on to Cremona.^ In the long and repeated interviews 
between the Emperor and the Pope all the points of 
dispute between them were examined.* It was decided 

* See the original sources collected in Ehses (IV., 334, n. i). 

2 The invitation to join the Pope was sent to Nausea by a brief of 
May 16, 1543, as an answer to his last letter of April 25 {se.& supra, 
p. 165). Nausea proposed to the Pope, Cologne or Ratisbon for the 
Council, but met with great opposition. Notwithstanding he held 
firmly to his proposal and published in 1 545 a work specially in its 
favour {cf. Pastor, Reunionsbestrebungen, 293, n. 2, where Nausea's 
communications with the Pope are assigned incorrectly to 1542). Cf. 
Ehses, IV., 327, n. 2. 

3 See Gualterius in Ehses, IV., 344, n. i ; Vandenesse, II., 256, and 
the *letter of Charles V. to Ferdinand I. of June 29, 1543 (Court and 
State Archives, Vienna). V. Gambara wrote a fine sonnet on the 
meeting (Rime e lett., 9 ; cf. Giorn. d. lett. Ital., IX., 338). 

* See for the following the important ^letter of Charles V. to 
Ferdinand I. of June 29, 1543, in Court and State Archives, Vienna 
(from which KORTE [p. 87] gives a passage relating to the Council ; 
the date July 29 in Korte is a printer's error), as well as the Imperial 
explanations to Philip and de Vega in Gayangos, VI., 2, n. 153, 282, 
pp. 376, 560 seq. Among the historians the account of JoviUS (Hist. 
I., 48) stands high. Adrian!, Sandoval, and Sarpi err, as Ehses (IV., 
349, n. i) well observes, in bringing forward excessive charges against 
Paul III., and Pallavicini (1. 5, c. 2-3) goes into the opposite extreme 


that further negotiations should be held in Rome over the 
Spanish pragmatic policy. The nomination of Cardinals 
of Imperial leanings, as wished for by Charles, fell through, 
for Paul III. held firmly that in the event of such a creation 
corresponding claims on the part of France would have 
to be considered. Charles V. proposed further that the 
hostile relations between the Pope and Ascanio Colonna 
should be brought to an end by the marriage of a son of 
Ascanio with Vittoria, the Pope's niece, an arrangement 
which meant the rupture of the negotiations begun over a 
marriage of this lady with the Duke of Orleans. Another 
question handled at Busseto related to the possession of 
Milan ; this was a matter closely bound up with the most 
important topic with which the diplomacy of that day had 
to deal : the reconciliation of Charles V. and Francis I. 

The plan already ventilated of conferring Milan on a 
third party was one which had been brought to the 
Emperor's immediate attention by his warmest adherent 
in the Sacred College — Cardinal Carpi. The latter had 
maintained in a memorial on the subject that Charles 
ought not to be Count, Duke, or Prince, but solely the 
Emperor ; he ought to be the owner not of many provinces 
but of great fiefs. With the possession of Milan his luck 
had deserted him. The restoration of the Duchy to 
Francis I. would not satisfy the latter's thirst for territory 
but only whet that appetite the more ; but he himself also 
ought not to be the owner, since thus he increased the 
number of his enemies and raised the suspicion that he was 
covetous of foreign countries. In the case of his wiping 
out this suspicion by erecting Milan into a special Duchy, 
Francis I. would no longer have adherents, Charles on the 
contrary would have Germany and Italy on his side, his 

of advocacy {cf. also Affo, 49 seq.\ Ranke, Papste, III., 36*; 
Brischar, I., 131 seq^. 


banners would fly over the most remote lands, and he 
would win undying glory.^ 

If the Emperor, then, was neither to resign Milan to 
the French nor keep it as his own, it might appear to him 
to be a good way of escape out of the difficulty to bestow 
it as a favour on Ottavio, his son-in-law, the Pope's nephew. 
This scheme, which was not a new one, was recommended 
to Charles at Genoa by Pier Luigi Farnese and now at 
Busseto made a subject of serious consultation. Charles 
had, in fact, no counter-project to suggest as to how he 
could then compass the desired peace.^ 

It seems that at the outset a hope had arisen of coming 
to an agreement on this basis, if it were true that the 
viceroy of Milan, the Marquis del Vasto, had already 
greeted, as was said, Margaret as Duchess of Milan. That 
Charles should have entered seriously into a "bargain 
over Milan " certainly appears questionable in view of 
the strategical importance of the place, but the Farnesi 
were counting on the financial necessity of the Emperor, 
who had only just handed over to Duke Cosimo the 
fortifications of Florence and Leghorn for money.^ 

* See *Discorso de Rev. Card, di Carpi del 1543 a Carlo V. Cesare 
del modo del dominare (Corsini Library, Rome, n. 443). Ranke 
(Papste, I., 6th ed., 162), who used this manuscript, thinks that the 
discourse perhaps dates from 1542; but there are also other copies, 
as the three in the Bibliothfeque Nationale, Paris (Cod. Ital., 10075, 
n. 3 ; 10076, n. 14 ; and Cod. 1067 [St. Victor]), and Cod. Urb., 855, 
f. 66 seq., of the Vatican Library, which have the date 1543. 

' Cf. Ehses, IV., 349, n. I. 

3 See Giovio's letters of June 15 and July 19, 1543, in Atanagi, 63 
seq. Giovio's opinion that Siena was also under consideration has been 
otherwise confirmed (see Mitteil. des osterr. Instituts, XXIIL, 129, 
n, i). Aquila and Tarento were also spoken of, as the *reports to 
the Duchess of Urbino of June 16, 1543, clearly show (State Archives, 
Florence, Urb. 266, f. 5-^4). 


The amount which Paul III. was to give for Milan had 
been discussed already in Genoa with Pier Luigi. The 
Emperor's demands were enormous ; at first two, then one 
million ducats, with perhaps yet other hard conditions such 
as the retention of the citadels of Milan and Cremona. It 
was owing to the exorbitant demands of Charles that the 
negotiations on this point at Busseto came to a standstill.^ 
They were not broken off; as Charles instructed his son 
to discuss 2 the matter with the Spanish Council of State, 
the Farnesi still cherished a hope of attaining their object. 

Although on this question Paul III., under family 
pressure, made himself deeply subservient to nepotism, he 
never lost sight of active endeavours to effectuate a peace. 
Giovio bears witness with what rare shrewdness and 
wonderful memory he availed himself of every opportunity 
that was of service to that object. As the Emperor in 
the bitterness of his enmity to Francis I. would not listen 
to the Pope's representations, the latter asked him to hear 
the Cardinals. Charles assented, and on June the 24th he 
appeared in the midst of the Sacred College. To the 
brilliant speech in which Cardinal Grimani recommended 
peace the Emperor replied with emphasis and conviction. 
With rising emotion he defended his old standpoint, so 
often explained before. As Paolo Giovio on taking his 
departure kissed his hand, the Emperor remarked : " Get 
ready to write, and give a correct account in your history 
book, for the war that is about to take place will furnish 
you with fresh and troublesome material." Paul III. 
expressed astonishment at the Emperor's passionate 

* See together with the authorities cited, si/pra, p. 174, n. 4, the 
*letter of June 16, 1543, from Girolamo Guicciardini to Cosimo I. 
(State Archives, Florence), already produced by Ranke (Piipste, I., 
6th ed., 164, n.). 

2 Cf. Gayangos, VI., 2, p. 377 seq. ; cf. ibid., 4i;3, 481. 

VOL, XII. '^ 13 


temperament, but gave assurance that in any case he 
would stand by King Ferdinand in his resistance to the 
Turks — a promise which was kept.^ 

With regard to the Council the Pope, taking into con- 
sideration the war in Europe and the danger arising from 
the Turk, proposed to the Emperor at Busseto^ that the 
Council should be suspended to a more suitable moment and 
at the same time that some place should be chosen other 
than Trent, which was unhealthy, cramped, and ill supplied 
with provisions. To this the Imperial ministers objected 
that the Diet of Ratisbon had agreed to Trent and de- 
manded the immediate tenure of the Council ; therefore, 
without consulting the Estates, the Emperor could not 
consent either to the suspension or the translation of the 
Council. As no agreement was reached, the Pope finally 
promised to take the advice of the Cardinals. 

In Trent during the last days of June Morone, in com- 
pliance with instructions from Farnese, drew up an inter- 
rogatory circular for the prelates asking what they thought 
ought to be done.^ The opinions were divided ; immediate 
translation to another place was favoured by the Archbishop 
of Corfu and the Bishops of Chironia, Feltre, Bertinoro, and 
Belcastro. Their principal reason rested on the considera- 
tion that the Synod, if it were to take place in Trent, 
would be essentially a Council of Germans under the 
influence of the Emperor, since the French bishops would 
not come to that city. Also, the assembly being authorized 
as a General Council by the Pope might easily, under 

* For the troops sent by the Pope (4000 men), see Manante, 275 ; 
Ehses, IV., 250. 

2 According to the Emperor's own instructions to his new orator 
at the Roman Curia, Juan de Vega, of July 4, 1543 (Gayangos, IV., 
2, n. 282, p. 560 ; Ehses, IV., 347, n. i). 

' Morone to Farnese, dat. June 30, 1543 (Ehses, IV., 345-348). 


those circumstances, be more dangerous than even a 
national council in Germany, to which also, perhaps, 
obstacles of the same kind might arise. The above-named 
bishops also put their objections in writing, and sent them 
to Farnese. 

The Archbishop of Otranto, on the contrary, saw the 
greatest danger in the threatened national council anc 
was of opinion that the most important question now 
was how to prevent the latter, since during the existing 
period of unrest it was impossible to carry out the Council 
at Trent or elsewhere ; the best course, he thought, would 
be to sustain the hope of a Council as it had existed 
hitherto, since a translation undertaken without the con- 
sent of the German princes, who had approved of Trent, 
would only offer them a temptation to take arbitrary 
proceedings. If, sooner or later, peace were brought 
about, the Council then could either be held in Trent, as 
the removal of external disadvantages was a matter of 
possibility, or be transferred elsewhere with the consent of 
all parties. This opinion of the Archbishop of Otranto, 
Morone added, was also in agreement with that of tht 
Bishop of Hildesheim and the other agents of the Cardinal 
of Mayence, who recently had been so much disturbed by the 
departure of the two Legates from Trent and whose last 
hope for the rescue of the Catholic remnant in Germany 
was bound up with the stability of the Council at Trent, 
while the dissolution of the latter or its removal from 
thence might be followed by the worst results. The 
present war also might soon come to an end, and with its 
cessation the chief obstacle to the Council would disappear. 
The Bishop of Eichstatt, when Morone was writing, was 
on his way to visit the Pope. 

Morone himself, in view of the great danger to Germany 
under all circumstances, was with difficulty able to adopt 


a decided attitude. On the one side there was present 
to his mind the assumption that the General Synod of 
the Church was now certainly impossible, on the other 
that the national synod or a Diet dealing with matters of 
religion was hardly avoidable, in which case the best 
course perhaps would be to revoke the publication of the 
Council and to announce by a Bull the impracticability 
of convening that assembly at Trent. In that case a 
Christian reformation might be carried out at once in 
those countries where the Papal obedience still prevailed. 
But Morone was still unable to make up his mind to 
recommend this method. He gave as his reason that this 
involved the assumption that Germany was lost beyond 
hope, an assumption from which conclusions must be drawn 
perilous to the rest of Christendom. Nor was Morone 
more attracted by the recommendation to prorogue the 
Council, since such a step, taken without the consent of 
the German princes, would affect the Empire in exactly 
the same way as a complete dissolution. He was there- 
fore most inclined to associate himself with the opinion 
of the Archbishop of Otranto, as thereby at least he 
would not be an accomplice in the inevitable ruin of 

After his meeting with Paul HI. the Emperor began his 
journey towards Trent, while the Papal decision on the 
question of the Council was awaited, and took up his 
quarters in that city from the 2nd to the 5th of July.^ 
In the suite of Charles V. were some Spanish bishops who 
now, when it was too late, expressed their willingness to 
take part in the Council and immediately afterwards 
departed, 2 

In Bologna, whither the Pope had returned on the ist of 

* Morone to Farnese, dat. July 2 and 4, 1543 {ibid., 348 segq.), 

• EhseS, IV., 21; I. 


July,^ he was delayed only by the expectation of Morone's 
report and that of the bishops assembled in Trent. On 
the arrival of these documents it was decided in a con- 
sistory held on July the 6th that the Council should be 
suspended until a more convenient date ; the resumption 
of the Synod was reserved for the Pope's decision. The 
Bull of suspension is of the same date, July the 6th; it 
makes retrospective mention of the Pope's efforts, calls 
attention to the six months' period of suspense in Trent, 
and states as reasons for the momentary impossibility of 
holding the Synod the war between the Christian princes 
and the Turkish danger ; Morone was recalled, and the 
prelates assembled in Trent dismissed.^ The Bull was not 
published until September the 19th ;3 a brief of July the 6th 
informed Morone of the consistorial decision.* He and 
the bishops waited in vain for the arrival of the Bull to 
enable them to take their departure,^ but not until July the 
25th did a brief arrive giving permission to leave Trent. 
Morone thereupon took his departure and the others dis- 
persed ;^ at the same time briefs announcing the suspension 
of the Council and giving the grounds for this decision 
were sent out to a number of metropolitans and princes.' 

1 Diary of Gaulterius {cf. supra, p. 169, n. 3), Secret Archives of 
the Vatican. 

2 The Bull of suspension of July 6, 1543, in EhSES, IV., 352-355. 
Cf. PallaVICINI, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 20; KORTE, 69 seq. See Massarelli, 
Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 419. 

3 Ehses, IV., 352, n. 4 ; Merkle, loc. cit. 
* Ehses, IV., 352. 

6 Morone to Farnese, dat. July 12 and 25, 1543 {ibid., 352, n. 3, 356). 

8 Ibid., 356, n. 3. 

' The brief to the Cardinal of Mayence from Bologna of July 10, 
1543 {ibid., 335 seq.); similar briefs to the Archbishop of Salzburg 
Treves, Bremen, Besangon, Gnesen ; on July 21 to the Dukes William 
and Louis of Bavaria and to the King of Poland {cf. ibid., 356). 


The suspension was undoubtedly justified, since under 
the existing circumstances nothing beneficial could be 
expected from the Council.^ Probably a certain number 
of votes were given vindictively as a retort to the 
Emperor's frustration of the Papal scheme concerning 
Milan. How far Charles V. shared this opinion must 
remain a matter of conjecture; what is certain is that as 
every prospect of his holding Milan for Ottavio Farnese 
melted away his relations with Paul III. became more and 
more delicate.^ To this many other causes contributed ; 
in order to keep the Protestants in a state of inaction, 
the Imperial diplomatists took care that they should be 
made aware of the tension which had arisen between the 
Pope and their master. With this object the bitter letter 
that Charles V. had addressed to Paul III. on the 25th of 
August 1542 was translated into German and circulated 
in printed copies.^ The document thus acquired an 
increased importance, and what a damaging effect such a 
measure must have had in Rome can easily be imagined.* 

The fresh state of tension between the Emperor and the 
Pope led of necessity to nearer relations between the latter 
and Francis I., an approximation which might become all 
the closer as the party of Charles V. in the Sacred College 

1 K. A. Menzel, II., 310. 

2 According to the *Vita di Alfonso d' Avalos, Marchese del 
Vasto (MS. in Cod. 34, E. 23, f. 267, of the Chigi Library, Rome), 
Charles V. had looked upon the Pope in this matter as a downright 

^ Cf. Ehses, IV., 238. For the long and violent letter of excuse 
from Francis I. in 1543, in which he tried to throw all the blame on 
the Emperor, cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 1, n. 3 ; Ehses, IV., 245, n. 2. 

* Paul III. (see *Diarium of Gualterius, Secret Archives of the 
Vatican) left Bologna on July 11, stayed in Ancona from the 20th to 
the 23rd, from July 30 to Aug. 8 in Perugia, from 13th to i6th in 
Viterbo, and returned on 19th to Rome. 


liad been reduced to very slender dimensions.^ The 
French King had for a long time been making efforts in 
a very tactful way to wipe out to some extent the stigma 
which he had incurred by his alliance with the infidel. 
When the Turkish flotilla under Chaireddin Barbarossa 
appeared at the mouth of the Tiber at the end of June 
1543, ^he French commissary who was on board made it 
publicly known that the Papal territory had nothing to 
fear. The Turks in fact refrained from any acts of plunder 
and soon afterwards withdrew from the coasts of the 
Papal States.2 The attitude also taken by Francis towards 
the religious innovations in France could not fail to 
produce a favourable effect upon the Pope. A few weeks 
after the declaration of war against Charles V. the King 
had ordered the Parliaments to take severe measures of 

' On March 30, 1543, Cardinal E. Gonzaga had already spoken in 
a ^letter to the Marchese del Vasto of the " pochi servitori, che si 
truova S. M. nel coUegio nostro, per la qual cosa un di potriamo 
vedersi far un papa tutto francese " who could do great harm. On 
Dec. 12, 1543, the Cardinal insists in a *letter to D. Ferrante, in con- 
nection with the death of Cardinal Grimaldi, " that there are but few 
servants of the Emperor in the Cardinalate, and such as there are 
(Accolti, Cibo) are so powerless that he beseeches earnestly that some 
steps may be taken to strengthen the party " (Cod. Barb, lat., 5790, 
f 150, and 5791, f. 165, of the Vatican Library.) Cf. also in Appendix 
No. 22 E. Gonzaga's letter of March 18, 1544. 

2 Cf. Jovius, Hist, I., 43, the reports in the Mitteil. des osterr. 
Instituts, XXIII., 130, and the *Ephem. in Cod. Vat., 6978, t. 148: 
"Die 29 Junii 1543 Romae disseminatum est Turcarum classem Ostia 
capta infestam adventare, eoque nuncio populus ita consternatus est, 
ut plerique metu aufugerint, omnes autem exsangui vultu formidabundi 
hue illuc concursaverint. Indignum facinus, quae urbs olim orbi 
terrarum pavori fuit earn tunc inani timore perculsam trepidasse ! — 
Hoc mense junio 1543 Regium lulium civitas Brutiorum a Turcarum 
classe duce Barbarossa direpta et incensa est, incolis omnibus secum 
captivis abductis" (Vatican Library), 


repression against all who showed disobedience to the 
Church; throughout the whole kingdom proceedings 
against the Protestants were ushered on to the stage with 
demonstrative effect. In this way not only was the Pope 
favourably impressed, but Charles V. and Ferdinand I. 
were also at the same time, with their obsequiousness 
towards the German Protestants, placed in a very pre- 
judicial light before the eyes of Catholic Christendom.^ 

As the crowning touch of all came the alliance of the 
Emperor with Henry VIII. of England. Charles V. made 
necessity his excuse for this connection whereby he was 
to protect himself against the combination, far more 
perilous to Christendom, of France and the Turks. His 
ambassador in Rome renewed his demands that the 
weapons of ecclesiastical and temporal power should be 
wielded against Francis ; this was all the more urgent 
since the King had provided the Turkish ships with 
every supply which could enable them to attack Nice. 
Paul III. replied to the Emperor's representative that if 
he were to direct his arms against the French, he could 
not dispose of them at sea and on land in Hungary, as 
was at present the case, to the advantage of the house 
of Hapsburg, but that if he brought ecclesiastical pressure 
to bear on Francis he would be exposing the Holy See to 
the danger of losing France just as it already had lost 
England. Besides, he saw himself placed in the necessity 
of now exercising also his functions as a judge and of 
examining with which of the two contending parties lay 
the guilt of hindering the consummation of the peace 
which was so necessary for the world.^ 

The Imperialists tried to excuse the policy of their master 
by calling attention to the dissimilarity of the alliances 

* Cf. SOLDAN, I., 179 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 22. 
2 Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 25 seq. 


formed by Charles and by Francis. The alliance of the 
Emperor and Henry VIII. aimed solely at victory over the 
French and consequently over their allies the Turks, it did 
not mean the support of the English monarch in his 
aggressions on the Holy See ; much rather was there 
ground for hope that the Emperor would be successful in 
bringing Henry once more into the right way.^ 

Paul III. was not moved from his standpoint of 
neutrality.^ As the mediator of peace he determined on 
November the 21st, 1543, to send Cardinal Alessandro 
Farnese as Legate to both the sovereigns.^ In order to 
gain the support of the German princes for his endeavours 
on behalf of peace, the Bishop of Sarno, Francesco Sfondrato, 
was despatched soon after; he was at the same time 
directed to justify the Pope's attitude in the question of 
the Council.* 

Farnese was given the Legatine cross in an assembly of 
Cardinals on the 27th of November 1543. The Imperial 
ambassador, Juan de Vega, who had replaced Aguilar^ in the 
summer of 1543, took this opportunity of trying to induce 
the Pope to come to an open breach with France. He laid, 
in fact, before the Pope a letter from Francis I. to his son 
the Duke of Orleans, together with a supplementary in- 
struction to the latter from which it appeared that the 
King was seeking the friendship of the Landgrave of Hesse 
and showed himself ready to introduce Protestantism into 

> Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 4, n. 25 seq. 

2 See Legaz. di A. Serristori, 130 seq. 

3 Acta Consist, in Pieper, 126. Cf. Druffel, Karl V., I., 7 seq. 

* Sfondrato's instructions of Nov. 30, 1543, in Ehses, IV., 257 seq. ; 
Morone's memorial for Farnese, based on the same grounds, of 
Nov. 25, 1543, in Pieper, 183-185. For Sfondrato's execution of his 
task, see Druffel, loc. cit., I., 8 seq. 

^ Cf. Gayangos, VI., 2, xlv seq. ; ibid., n. 282, the instructions for 
Vega, dated July 4, 1543. 


Luxembourg. But Paul III. was not to be drawn into 
any precipitate measures ; he postponed an inquiry into 
the circumstances until the next consistory. On this 
occasion he discounted the Imperial ambassador's eulogies 
of his master's adherence to the Holy See, the reward of 
which fidelity was to be a forced alliance on the Pope's 
part against France, by ordering a report to be presented 
through Cardinal Parisio on certain pragmatic decrees 
issued in Spain by Charles V. of a nature derogatory to 
the rights and freedom of the Church. With regard to 
the documents impleaded against the King of France, 
since they were the originals, it was resolved that the 
nuncio should have speech with the King upon the matter 
and receive from him his justification. 

In the consistory of the 19th of December 1543 a heated 
altercation took place between the Pope and the Cardinal 
of Burgos, Juan Alvarez de Toledo. The latter complained 
of the severe sentence passed on the pragmatic measures 
taken in Spain, while similar enactments in France and 
other countries passed into law without criticism. When 
Paul III. remarked that he was opposed in general to all 
such legislation, but that the Spanish was much the most 
objectionable, the Cardinal retorted : " The French alliance 
with the Turks and yet other things worse than that were 
winked at." The Pope brought the discussion to an end 
by referring to the Emperor's alliance with Henry VIII., 
which was worse than a compact with the Turks.^ 

' Cf. PaLLAVICINI, 1. 5, c. 5, and the copious authoruits given in 
EhseS, IV., 378, n. ; see here also for the Spanish Pragmatic of 
April 2, 1544. For the efforts of Charles V. in Spain to carry out an 
anti-papal and State Church policy, see Ranke, Osmanen, 225 seq.^ and 
Armstrong, II., 65 seq. Here are some remarks on Paul III. and 
the Spanish Inquisition on behalf of which Charles intervened. With 
reg id to the French Pragmatic arrangements, see Schmidt, Franzos. 


Cardinal Farnese, accompanied by Giovanni Ricci and 
Niccolo Ardinghelli, had left Rome on the 28th of November 
1543. He travelled first to the seat of the French court, 
where a very respectful reception greeted him ; thence on 
the 6th of January 1544^ he went to the Emperor. On 
reaching Brussels on the 12th he found that Charles had 
already left, and not until the 20th of January did the 
Cardinal come up with him, at Kreuznach; on the 23rd 
both made their entry on horseback into Worms. 

Farnese delivered a letter from the Pope to the Emperor 
exhorting to peace. In order to conduce to the restora- 
tion of peace between the Emperor and the King he made 
certain proposals in which the surrender of Milan or the 
cession of Savoy to France were suggested. Charles V. was 
convinced that the Pope's peace proposals were mere words 
which held out no prospect of results. He was determined, 
as he himself said, neither to allow himself to be caught 
nor to give up the execution of his plans and the pursuit 
of the military undertakings which he had entered upon in 
order to re-acquire what had already been wrested from 
him. He declared to the Cardinal that, as long as a hand's 
breadth of Italian soil was in the grasp of France, a peace 
was impossible. The Emperor was so excited that he 
hardly allowed Farnese to finish his speech, and he broke 

Gesch., II., 685. For the tension then existing in the relations 
between the Pope and the Emperor, cf. Serristori's *reports of Dec 12, 
16, and 22, 1543 (State Archives, Florence). The accusation brought 
in 1 546 by L. Malatesta that the Farnese family had, previous to the 
meeting at Busseto(!), conspired through Matteo Varano against the 
life of Charles V. (see Arch. stor. Ital, 5th Series, XVI., 98), deserves 
no credence (see Brosch in the Mitteil. das osterr. Instituts, XXIII., 
131 seq.\ cf. specially Massignan, Di una supposta congiura ordita dai 
Farnesi contra la vita di Carlo V., Padova, 1901). 

* Cf. Dandino's *letter, dat. Paris, Jan. 9, 1 544. Nunz. di Francia, 2 
(Secret Archives of the Vatican). 


in upon his explanations with the words: " Monsignore, 
through us you hold the Archbishopric of Monreale, your 
father became Duke of Novara, Ottavio Farnese received 
the hand of our daughter with an income of 20,000 ducats ; 
in order to come to agreement with his Holiness we 
have suffered the loss of two of our best friends, the Duke 
of Urbino and Ascanio Colonna ; and now we are so 
treated, and must submit to it, that the Vicar of Christ, 
who has received so many benefits at our hands, is ready 
to join forces with the King of France or rather, we should 
say, with the Turk. He may well look to it that we do 
not deal the same measure to him that we dealt to 
Clement VH." 

The Cardinal's attempt to justify the Pope's action was 
dismissed by Charles with the remark that he knew more 
than enough of the obstinacy of Paul HI. It was there- 
fore superfluous to have more words on the matter. The 
Cardinal, who during this painful interview had shown 
great self-command, asked at its close that he might have 
the Emperor's permission to discuss the question further 
with Granvelle; to that Charles V. offered no objection. 

With the Emperor in this frame of mind there was 
little to hope for from negotiations with Granvelle and 
Idiaquez. On the 24th of January the Cardinal had 
once more an audience of the Emperor to which also 
Granvelle, Idiaquez, and the nuncio Poggio were admitted. 
The long debates, in which religious questions as well as 
political were bandied to and fro, were entirely fruitless. 
On Farnese entreating that at the coming Diet the interests 
of religion should be borne in mind, the Emperor asked 
him what counsels in particular the Pope had to impart to 
him. When the Cardinal replied to this apologetically 
that he had no instructions, Charles rejoined that at previous 
Diets the representatives of Rome had done more harm 


than good ; at the ensuing Diet the reform of the Church 
and the removal of abuses would be dealt with ; he was 
resolved to do his duty as a Christian prince. 

Farnese could not conceal from himself that his mission 
was a total failure. The Emperor rejected all overtures to 
France and showed openly that in the approaching Diet 
he would have no impediment raised to his negotiations 
with the Protestants by the presence of a Papal Legate. 
The Cardinal was still sufficiently master of himself to 
avoid an open rupture, and in order to facilitate the re- 
adjustment of relationships he declared the Pope's readi- 
ness to give 50,000 ducats to the funds of the Catholic 
League. Sfondrato remained behind to attend to the 
settlement of this point, while Farnese at once began his 
return journey to Rome.^ 

The Emperor went from Worms to Spires for the Diet, 
where he hoped the Estates would give him open-handed 
support in obtaining a full reckoning from France, In 
this he was successful, since in the Recess of June the loth 
1544 he made such large concessions to the powerful 
confederates of Schmalkald as well-nigh to give away the 
Catholic cause.^ 

In this Recess the Council was spoken of in a manner 

^ The principal authority for Farnese's negotiations with the Emperor 
is the report intended for Vega's information in Lanz, Staatspapiere, 
346 seqq. Cf. also Comment, de Charles V., 80 ; Druffel, Karl V., 
i, 14 seq., and Gayangos, VII., 7, n. 18 seq. That the report in Lanz 
should be dated Jan. 25, 1 544, had already been pointed out by Gachard 
before Druffel (Biogr. nat., III., 682). A very important addition for 
the audience given to Farnese by Charles V. is contained in the letter 
of Cardinal E. Gonzaga of March 18, 1544, given in Appendix No. 22, 
and found by me in the Vatican Library. 

2 Cf. Menzel (II., 325), who concurs with this opinion, MaUREN- 
BRECHER (p. 61), Janssen-Pastor (III., i8th ed., 579) and BrzOLD 
p. 747). 


and in terms which were entirely Protestant ; the authority 
of Pope and Church were passed by without mention. 
As it was uncertain whether and how soon "a common, 
Christian, free Council" would be held, a fresh Diet 
ought to be summoned before the expiry of another 
year or a German national synod called to settle the 
religious question in Germany pending the meeting of a 
General Council, all to be done without participation by 
the Pope, in accordance with proposals emanating from 
the Emperor and the Estates of the Empire through their 
theologians. During the interval concessions surpassing 
all their boldest hopes would be made to the Protestants 
in respect of the sequestrated Church property, the re- 
constitution of the Imperial Court of Chancery, and the 
cases affecting religion still in litigation. The cases were 
to be quashed and assessors belonging to the Protestant 
party admitted to the Court of Chancery. Finally, the 
Catholics were bound to contribute to the churches and 
institutions which had been taken possession of by the 

The resolutions of Spires, a copy of which reached Rome 
through Veralloin the middle of July, must have given the 
greatest offence to the Pope. The French party in Rome 
exulted; they hoped now to bring Paul III. completely 
round; as early as March, after Farnese's return,^ the 
French thought that their goal was in sight. The Cardinal- 
Legate's ungracious reception and speedy dismissal by the 

* See Neue Sammlung der Reichsabscheide, l\., 4g$seg. For the 
Diet of Spires, f/: Haberlin, XII., 473 seg. ; Janssen-Pastor, III., 
i8th ed., 576 se^.; Winkelmann, III., 358 se^., and DE Boor, 
Beitr. zur Geschichte des Speirer Reichstages von 1544, Strassburg, 

2 The Cardinal re-entered Rome on March i, 1544 ; see Raynaldus, 
U4?, n. I 


Emperor made all the more impression on the susceptible 
Pope^ as they were in sharp contrast to the brilliant 
advances of the French court. The results of Farnese's 
mission to France consisted in the agreement of Francis I. 
to the marriage of the Duke of Orleans and Vittoria 
Farnese, whose dowry was to be made up of Parma and 
Piacenza. In return the King demanded of the Pope an 
open declaration in his favour and against Charles V. 
This Pier Luigi now sought to prevent with all his power. 
This man's influence over Paul III. was then unusually 
great, for Farnese was at the time making ostensibly a 
change for the better in his mode of life. According to 
the account given by Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, Pier Luigi 
did not cease to represent to the Pope that a war with the 
Emperor must inevitably bring with it in its train the ruin of 
the family of Farnese.^ In consequence of this no express 
and public hostility to Charles was evinced, but it was 
perceptible from other signs that the Pope's preference was 
veering towards France. 

It was not merely the censure on April the 2nd of the 
Spanish pragmatic measures which filled the Imperial 
party in Rome with anxiety ; they found no less cause for 
apprehension in the Pope's repeated evening conversations 
and the secret proceedings in consistory.^ About this time 
the ambassador de Vega had begun to drop all diplomatic 
considerations. When on the 3rd of April he met, at the 
house of Margaret, the Emperor's daughter and wife of 

* He had been much displeased at Charles V. for not awaiting the 
Cardinal's presence in the Netherlands ; see F. Babbi's *report, 
Jan. 17, 1544 (State Archives, Florence). 

"^ Cf.'va. Appendix No. 22 Cardinal E. Gonzaga's important letter of 
March 18, 1544 (Vatican Library). Pier Luigi's reformation, if meant 
seriously, did not last long {cf. LUZIO, Pronostico, XXXIV.). 

' See Legazioni di A. Serristori, 133, 135, 


Ottavio, Cardinal Alessandro, and the latter used expres- 
sions of courtesy towards the Emperor, de Vega replied 
that such words were worthless; he wished to see deeds. 
Passing on to the secret transactions in consistory, the 
ambassador observed that he knew that the betrothal of 
Vittoria to the Duke of Orleans had been discussed ; such 
a violation of neutrality would bring with it the ruin of his 
Holiness, the ruin of the Holy See and of the house of 

Matters became still more acute when Margaret in her 
impetuous way took up the Imperial party with intensity 
and allowed herself to make disparaging remarks on the 
" Farnese brood."* Paul HI.'s enemies, Cosimo de' Medici 
and Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, flung oil on the flames.^ 
Cosimo's representative informed de Vega that his Duke 
had been informed that with the favourable connivance of 
the Farnesi, French recruiting was going on in the Papal 

De Vega forgot himself so entirely as to reply to Pier 
Luigi, who, before leaving for Parma, had conveyed to 
him his willingness to do something for the Emperor, 
that he would certainly let the latter know how badly 
his servants and relatives demeaned themselves.* A 
similarly sharp expression was used by Charles himself 
towards the Papal nuncio.^ Yielding to the pressure 
from Henry VHI., he at last even made up his mind to 
recall his ambassador from Rome.® 

^ See Legazioni di A. Serristori, 136. 

2 Ibid., 139. 

3 Cf. Cardinal E. Gonznga's *letters to D. Ferrante of March 18 
and 25 and April 5. Cod. Barb, lat., 5792, f. 20, 23, 26'' seq. (Vatican 

* Legazioni di A. Serristori, 139. 

* See B. Ruggieri's report in Balan, VL, 363, n. 3. 

« See Druffel, Karl V., L, 63, and Ehses, IV., 377, n. 8, 


On the evening of May the 22nd de Vega secretly left 
Rome^ without taking leave of the Pope and without 
leaving any representative behind. While this critical 
situation lasted Alessandro Farnese maintained the un- 
disturbed calm of the practised diplomatist. A short time 
before, when Margaret one day blurted out, " Don't you 
see that in view of the Emperor's indubitable victory 
you are preparing the ruin of your house?" he replied, 
" Madam, when the Emperor's victory is an assured fact — 
then our position will at once be clearly taken. But who 
knows what is going to happen ? " ^ 

These words denote plainly the actual situation of 
affairs. Papal diplomacy before taking a definite position 
wished to know what the outcome of the great contest 
was to be. A friend of Cardinal Gonzaga was of 
opinion, in the beginning of June, that Paul III. would 
think more than thrice before he made open cause with 
Francis I.^ But that in view of the Emperor's threatening 
demeanour the Pope should have thought of making his 
position sure by an alliance with Venice and the Catholic 
Estates of Germany can cause no surprise.* On the 9th 
of June Cardinal Ippolito d'Este arrived in Rome as 
French ambassador, after having previously, certainly 
without success, tried to woo the Republic into an alliance.^ 
The reception prepared for him was exceptionally mag- 
nificent, and his apartments were in the palace of the 
Cancelleria. The Romans now believed that the triple 

^ He only informed Margaret and Serristori ; see the *report of 
latter of May 23, 1544 (Florentine State Archives). 

2 Legazioni di A. Serristori, 140. 

^ See Cardinal E. Gonzaga's *ietter to Granvelle of June 3, 1544. 
Cod. Barb, lat., 5792, f. 64 (Vatican Library). 

* See Ehses, IV., 377, n. 8. 

* See Brosch in the Mitteil. des osterr. Inst, XXIII., 132 seq.', 
Atti Mod., IV., 142, 158 scq. 

VOL. xn. ' w 


alliance of Rome, France, and Venice was already con- 
cluded, especially as the city was full of rumours of the 
seductive offers held out by Francis to the members of 
the Farnese family.^ 

The Romans were as much deceived as those diplo- 
matists who thought that the Emperor's ominous attitude 
at Spires and other signs of enmity from the Imperialists^ 
would drive the Pope to an open rupture with the temporal 
head of Christendom ; Giovio, as was shown, was a much 
shrewder judge of the situation when he wrote, in his caustic 
way, on June the 7th to the Duke of Ferrara, " Pope Paul 
as a man of common-sense and high character will certainly 
remain neutral. The day after to-morrow the Cardinal of 
Ferrara will be here knocking at a door which won't open. 
His Holiness will wrap himself up tightly and hang weights 
on his feet so as to elude any temptation to take flight. 
It is said that the Cardinal of Ferrara will, as he did in 
Venice, pray here also for help ; but St. Peter will stand 
just as neutral as St. Mark."^ 

Even if Paul III. had secret inclinations towards the 
side of France,* he still avoided an open declaration ; for 
ten years he had kept his neutrality, and to that policy he 
clung as before. Therefore, when rumours were abroad of 
negotiations between the two opponents, he determined, 
notwithstanding his hitherto discomfiting rebuffs, in a 
consistory held on the 30th of July, to support the cause 

* Cf. Arch. stor. Ital., Append., VI., 171 seq. ; Druffel, loc. cil., I., 
64. Cf. also AdRIANI, IV., c. 4. 

2 Besides Vega's departure another weight was thrown into the 
scale, the rumour that Charles V. had sent for Ascanio Colonna ; see 
Serristori's *report of June 23, 1544 (State Archives, Florence). 

3 Desjardins, III., 49, 50. 

♦ See Adriani, IV., c 4 ; ^ Brosch, I., 180, n. i, and Staffetti, 
in Arch. stor. Ital., 5th Series, XV., 71, 


of peace by the despatch of Legates. Cardinal Morone 
was sent to the Emperor and Cardinal Grimani to 
Francis I.^ 

In the same consistory measures were taken with 
respect to the Recess of Spires, which had been so injurious 
to Catholic interests. Already at the beginning of June 
the Pope and Cardinals had discussed this question. To 
pass over in silence resolutions so damaging to religion 
and the authority of the Holy See seemed irreconcilable 
with the Pope's duty as the chief ruler of the Church,^ 
Every effort ought to be made to induce the Emperor 
to withdraw his concessions. Giovanni Ricci, Archbishop 
of Siponto, who had been appointed nuncio to Portugal 
on the 27th of July 1544, was instructed accordingly to 
bring the influence of the King of Portugal, of Prince 
Philip of Spain, and other prominent personages in that 
kingdom to bear upon Charles V.^ A very severe letter 
of remonstrance for transmission to the Emperor himself 
was drawn up and read aloud in the consistory of July 
the 30th.* 

This important document, the composition of which 
was largely the work of Cardinal Carafa, was at last 
completed on August the 24th after yet another discus- 
sion on the Recess of Spires in a special congregation 
of Cardinals. Besides the letter to the Emperor, others 
of similar import were addressed at the same time to 
his confessor Soto and to Granvelle. They contained 
exhortations to act counter to the Spires resolutions. 

> See Raynaldus, i 544, n. 20 ; Pieper, t 28 : Ehses, IV., 363, 
n. 4. 

2 See Farnese's letters of July 22 and 23, in EhseS, IV., 358, n. 2 j 
cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 5, n. 5. 

3 See Ehses, IV., 362 seq. 

* Acta Consist, in EhseS, IV., 364, n. 2. 


Protests against the Recess^ were also sent to King 
Ferdinand and the Catholic princes of the Empire. 

In the comprehensive brief addressed to Charles V.^ on 
the 24th of August 1544 the Pope began by enforcing the 
duty that lay upon him of protesting against the decrees of 
Spires. He did not wish to incur the penalties of the high 
priest Heli, who left unchastised the evil doings of his sons, 
but to shield himself as well as the Emperor from the 
wrath of God. The resolutions of the Recess of Spires 
excluded from the treatment of religious affairs the very 
person who, from the first existence of the Church, had 
wielded the first and highest authority in that sphere. In 
his place laymen, even the votaries of condemned teachers 
of error, were indiscriminately to pronounce their decisions. 
Yet the Emperor ought not to listen to those enemies of 
the Church who whispered in his ear that the priests and 
pastors of the faithful were neglecting their duties and 
that he ought to step into their place, for even the best will 
and intention could not justify in the affairs of the Church, 
any more than in the affairs of a private household, the 
intrusion of alien authority into matters placed by the 
ordinance of God in the hands of another. Even Oza, 
who wished to uphold the tottering Ark of the Covenant 
and certainly was inspired by the best of motives, was yet 
instantaneously struck down by the hand of God because 
he did that which only the priests and Levites had a right 
to do. Why were Core, Dathan, and Abiron swallowed up 

1 See Rayn ALDUS, 1544, n. 8, 9 ; Ehses, IV., 364, n. 2. For the 
participation by Carafa, see SiLOS, I., 243 ; Bromato, II., 94 seq. 

2 Best edition in Ehses, IV., 364-373 ; an Italian translation in 
Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 6. Another version, sharper in tone, was first 
published by Raynaldus (1544. "• 7), who supposed (mistakenly) 
that this was the brief actually sent to Charles V. and which is 
reproduced by Ehses (IV., 374-379) ; it is probably an early draft 
which afterwards was softened down in form. 


in an earthquake if it were not that they arrogated to 
themselves the dignity and functions of the priesthood ? 
And yet the priesthood of the Covenant was only the 
shadow of the Christian priesthood. King Ozias, other- 
wise so distinguished, was carried away by pride at his 
successes and, despite the opposition of the priests, entered 
into the holy place to kindle incense on the altar, and 
straightway became a leper all the days of his life. Yet 
to what a pitch of power and renown had God raised those 
Emperors who, like Constantine and Theodosius and 
Charles the Great, had shown honour to the priesthood of 
His Church. How evil had been the end of such enemies 
and persecutors as Anastasius, Maurice, Constans II., 
Justinian II., Philippinus, Leo III., and, later, Henry IV. 
and Frederick II. Next to the people of the Jews, who 
had denied the Saviour Himself, no nation had suffered 
severer punishments than the Greeks, whose stubborn 
obstinacy had hardened them in separation and apostasy 
from the Holy See. How then should Charles V. escape 
the wrath of God if he walked in the footsteps of such 
hostile Emperors, he the successor of those who in days 
gone by had been careful to render to the Church the 
same meed of honour which they had received from her? 

The settlement of the religious difficulties lay nearer, 
the Pope continued, to no man's heart than to his own ; 
but even in the pursuit of so beneficent an aim he could 
not yield to the Emperor the place of leadership, but only 
concede to him the mighty office of champion and pray 
him to exercise the same. More than that was not re 
quired, since on his own initiative the Pope had greeted 
with joy any opportunity which gave the least hope ol" 
opening the Council. On every occasion when the most 
slender possibility of holding the Synod showed itself he 
had sent his Legates ; the Germans, whose reconciliation 


was made increasingly difficult by the Emperor's ever- 
enlarged concessions, he had treated with more compliancy 
than any other nation, inasmuch as he had appointed 
Trent to be the meeting-place and had sent his Legates 
thither; but " I came, and there was not a man: I called, 
and there was none that would hear " (Isa. 1. 2), Even now 
the Pope is not to blame if the Council is not a reality ; 
one thing only is wanting, and that is the conclusion 
of peace between the Emperor and the Christian princes, 
Francis I. in particular, since the war is the only obstacle 
which has caused the postponement of the Council. The 
Emperor therefore has it in his power to open up the 
way for the Council ; to the Emperor it belongs to listen 
in matters of faith to the Pope's voice and to give the 
latter a free hand in the matters appertaining to his office ; 
to the Emperor it belongs to withdraw the concessions 
made with untimely leniency to the enemies of the 
Church. Otherwise the Pope cannot rest satisfied with 
mere admonition, in which even Heli was not sparing 
towards his sons, but with the help of God will take all 
those steps the neglect of which brought upon Heli so 
grievous a punishment. 

This hortatory letter was to be delivered by Cardinal 
Morone. But Charles V., then in the midst of his war with 
Francis I., refused in the most positive way to receive the 
Legate. Cardinal Farnese lost no time in informing 
Morone of this on the 9th of September ; the latter received 
the news at Lyons on the 1 5th of September and thereupon 
began his return journey .^ As soon afterwards peace was 
concluded between Charles and Francis at Crespy, Grimani's 
mission also was rendered superfluous. 

The Papal chamberlain David Odasio was entrusted 
with the delivery to Morone of the letter of expostulation. 

» See PiEPER, 128; Ehses, IV., 365, n. 


When he reached the Imperial headquarters he found, 
contrary to expectation, that Morone was absent. Since 
he had no instructions to deliver the letter to the Emperor 
in person, he only left a copy of it at the court and 
brought back the original with him to Rome, but the 
letters addressed to Soto and Granvelle he delivered. The 
presentation of the original letter to the Emperor was then 
committed to Flaminio Savelli, a relative of Charles, wh© 
started for Worms at the end of January 1545 in order 
to convey to Otto von Truchsess, Bishop of Augsburg, the 
insignia of the Cardinalate.^ 

The communication of the letters to King Ferdinand 
and the Catholic Estates was entrusted to Giovanni 
Tommaso Sanfelice, Bishop of Cava, who on the 27th of 
August 1544 had been appointed nuncio-extraordinary to 
Germany. The latter accomplished his mission with such 
despatch that Ferdinand I. was already in possession on 
September the 24th of the letter addressed to the Emperor.^ 
At the moment of its delivery the contents of this im- 
portant document had already been anticipated by facts. 
Peace between Charles V. and Francis I. had been con< 

The conditions agreed to at Crespy on the 17th of 

* The duplicate despatch of the brief through Odasio and Savelli is 
witnessed to by Massarelli in his Diary, I., on March 25, 1545 (ed. 
Merkle, I., 163). Cf. also the explanations in Ehses (IV., 364 seq., 
n. 2), who discusses the opinions impugning the correctness of 
Massarelli's statements in Druffel (Karl V., L, 73 seq.)^ FriedenS- 
BURG (Nuntiaturberichte, VI IL, 24), and Merkle (I., 421, n. i). 

2 See Ehses, IV., 364, n. 2. At the Diet of Worms on April 7, 1545, 
Granvelle complains vehemently to Mignanelli of the Bishop of Cava's 
mission, especially as the brief had thus fallen into the hands of the 
Lutherans and afforded them opportunity for attacks (see Mig- 
nanelli's report of April 9, 1545, in the Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 97; 
cf. Drijffel-Brandi, 42). 


September, to the exclusion of the Pope,^ signified for the 
French King an honourable peace. In order to settle the 
dispute over Milan it was stipulated that the Duke of 
Orleans, Francis' second son, should marry either the 
eldest daughter of the Emperor, Maria, or a daughter of 
King Ferdinand, receiving in the former case the Nether- 
lands and in the latter Milan. The Emperor renounced 
his claims on Burgundy, the King restored Savoy and 
gave up his claims on Milan, Naples, Flanders, and Artois. 
Both monarchs engaged themselves to join in common 
warfare against the Turks and to give mutual support to 
each other towards the "reunion of religion." In the 
latter connection secret articles were agreed to that both 
princes should support the Council and carry out its 
decrees by armed force. Francis I. promised to make 
no more fresh alliances, especially with the Protestants of 

The conclusion of peace removed one of the principal 
causes of the Emperor's irritation against the Pope. 
Further, as a wise statesman Charles V. perceived that 
an answer to the letter of expostulation could not well 
be sent without inflicting serious injury on the honour 
and reputation of the two heads of Christendom;^ he 
also felt that in the Recess he had agreed to more 
"than he could be responsible for."^ After calm reflec- 
tion he could not but see that the Pope's complaints on 
this score were not unjustified ; statesmanship and Catholic 

1 Cf. Capasso, Politica, I., 44. 

2 Cf. Baumgarten in the Histor. Zeitschr., XXVI., 31, and Druffel, 
Karl v., I., 49 seq.^ for the date of the treaty (17 or 19 Sept.). For the 
sense of the last somewhat indefinitely worded article of peace and the 
secret tendency of the parties to the treaty, see Soldan, I., 186 seq. 

3 Commentaires, 98 ; Ehses, IV., 371, n. 2, and 382, n. i. 

* Conversation with the Elector of Saxony (see Schmidt, Gesch. 
der Deutschen, XII., 333 seq^. 


sentiment were equal determinants in the decision to give 
only a verbal answer to the Pope's letter. Taking into 
consideration the great importance of the matters dealt 
with in the letter and the manner in which expressions 
used in that document affected the Imperial authority, 
dignity, and reputation, it seemed better that the Emperor's 
detailed reply should be reserved for a more suitable 
occasion. Then it could be explained and clearly proved 
that he had no guilty responsibility for the doleful condition 
of Christendom, but that personally as well as indirectly 
he had persistently endeavoured to avoid and ward off 
such calamities, as was the duty not only of a good Emperor 
and as the dignity and authority of the Empire demanded, 
but as befitted every Catholic prince who was loyal to the 
reverence due to the Apostolic See. If everyone according 
to his position and rank had so acted, the present distresses 
of Christendom would have been avoided.^ 

The admirable self-restraint then observed by Charles V. 
redounded to his lasting reputation as a Catholic and a 
statesman. It shattered the hopes of the Protestants that 
the two heads of Christendom would be involved in sacri- 
legious strife and led the way to a combination between 
Pope and Emperor from which the greatest results would 
follow. The state of affairs demanded that a good under- 
standing should exist between the two highest powers in 
the world. That these two should, especially at first, have 
approached each other with grave misgivings is only too 
intelligible from the course of previous events. 

First of all, at the end of November the interrupted 
diplomatic relations were resumed in the regular way by 
the return of Vega to the post^ from which he had with- 

' Druffel, Karl V., I., 78, 79. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 15. Cf. Charles V.'s instru' tions to 
Vega of Dec. 2, 1544, in Gayangos, VII., i, n. 258. 


drawn in May. Opportunity for a fresh fit of petulance 
was given by the nomination of Cardinals on the 19th 
of December, at which certainly three Spanish prelates 
(Francisco Mendoza de Coria, Gasparo d'Avalos of 
Compostela, and Bartolome de la Cueva) were appointed 
to the purple, but to the exclusion of Charles's principal 
nominee, Pedro Pacheco. The Emperor was so unable 
to suppress his annoyance that he forbade the prelates 
above mentioned to assume their Cardinal's dress.^ Under 
these circumstances it was not surprising that Pier Luigi 
Farnese's secretary, Annibale Caro, who was to sound the 
Emperor as to his master's investiture with Parma and 
Piacenza, met with the very worst reception.^ The Bishop 
of Trent, Cardinal Cristoforo Madruzzo, and the Bishop of 

^ See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 18 j^^. Red hats were also bestowed 
on Dec. 19, 1544, on: two Frenchmen, George d'Armagnac and 
Jacques d'Annebaut ; one German : the Bishop of Augsburg, Otto 
Truchsess von Waldburg, and seven Italians : Francesco Sfondrato, 
Federigo Cesi, Niccolo Ardinghello, Andrea Cornaro, Girolamo 
Capodiferro, Durante de' Duranti, and Tiberio Crispo. With the ex- 
ception of the two last all were excellent men who had often 
distinguished themselves in ecclesiastical posts. Cf. Ciaconius, III., 
688 seqq., and Cardella, IV., 253 seq. (in the names of the bishoprics 
here attributed to the above named there are numerous errors). For 
Truchsess, see Histor. Jahrb., VII., 177 seq., 369 seq., XX., 71 seq.; 
Allgem. deutsche Biogr., XXIV., 634 seqq. ; Wetzer and Welte, 
Kirchenlexicon, XII., 2nd ed., 114 seq. ; the Cardinal's brief for 
Truchsess is in Ehses, IV., 440, n. 2. For Cesi, see Garampi, App. 
253 ; ibid., 262 seq., for Capodiferro and Cornaro. For N. Ardinghello, 
see Mazzuchelli, I., 2, 981 seq. For Mendoza, see Fonds grec de 
I'Escorial, 43 seqq. The elevation of Durante and Crispo, in sur- 
prising contrast to the usual caution of Paul III. in his nominations, 
is attributed by Massarelli to the influence of the covetous Costanza 
Farnese who had deceived the Pope (Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 
195, 196). 

* See Aff6, 62 seq.; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 21, 638. 


Augsburg, Cardinal Otto von Truchsess, then undertook 
with success to renew closer relations between the Pope 
and the Hapsburg brothers.^ 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, VI IL, 23 seq. For the very strained 
relations between Paul IIL and Charles V. in the spring of 1545, se« 
the *letter of Cardinal E. Goniaga of March 7, 1545, in Appendix 
No. 23 (\'atican Library). 


Spread of the German Schism. — Cardinal Farnese's Mission 
TO Worms. — Negotiations for an Alliance between 
Paul III. and Charles V. against the Protestants. — 
Investiture of Pier Luigi Farnese with Parma and 
PiACENZA. — The convening of the Council of Trent. 

The concurrent pressure upon the house of Hapsburg 
from the Turks and the French since the year 1541 had 
been used by the Schmalkaldic League as an opportunity 
for usurping authority over the Catholic Estates of the 
Empire and introducing the new ecclesiastical system 
into regions of Germany which hitherto had been Catholic. 
To the protestantizing of the bishoprics of Naumburg, 
Zeitz, and Meissen had succeeded the campaign of the 
Elector John Frederick of Saxony and the Landgrave 
Philip of Hesse against Duke Henry of Brunswick, the 
last prince of importance who still held fast in northern 
Germany to the ancient faith. The enterprise was success- 
ful, for Henry was unprepared for war; the Schmalkaldic 
forces had no difficulty in taking possession of the Duchy, 
into which they at once introduced the new doctrines. 
After that the overthrow of the old Catholic conditions in 
Hildesheim and Thuringian Miihlhausen was also carried 
out by means of violence. In south Germany the year 
1542 saw the introduction of the Protestant teaching into 
the city of Ratisbon, while in the following year the Count 



Palatine, Otto Henry of Pfalz-Neuburg gave his adhesion 
to the same cause.^ 

On the Lower Rhine still heavier losses awaited the 
Church. There no less a personage than the Prince Elector 
and Archbishop of Cologne, Hermann von Wied, threatened 
to secede. The total incapacity of this prelate in theo- 
logical learning — he had never succeeded in becoming 
master of the Latin language — was in strong contrast with 
his passionate interference in theological questions. At 
first an opponent of the Lutheran heresies, this inconsistent 
prince of the Church showed later a suspicious inclination 
to patronize the advocates of the new system. Little by 
little the Archbishop, whose theological standpoint was 
hopelessly confused, found himself on a precipitous slope 
on which he entirely lost his footing. At the end of 1542 
he summoned Bucer to Bonn and ordered his priests to 
administer the chalice to the laity and to preach Lutheran 
sermons. Although the Cathedral Chapter, the Uni- 
versity, and the city clergy of Cologne held out manfully 
on behalf of the Catholic faith, Hermann persisted in his 
efforts to protestantize his diocese. In May 1543 Mel- 
anchthon visited Bonn in person, and in July the secular 
Estates declared themselves in agreement with the Arch- 
bishop's course of action.^ 

At the same time it was rumoured that Francis von 
Waldeck, Bishop of Miinster, Minden, and Osnabriick, was 
on the brink of apostasy. This prelate, prone to intemper- 

^ Cf. JaNSSEN-PaSTOR, in.,'8 528 seqq., 538 seq., 548 seq., 561 seq. 
See also Knieb, Gesch. der kath. Kirche in der freien Reichstadt 
Muhlhausen, Freiburg, 1907, 37 seq. 

2 Cf. Varrentrapp, H. von Wied und sein Reformationsversuch 
in Koln, Leipzig, 1878 ; Floss and Pastor in the Annalen der Histor, 
Vereins fiir den Niederrhein, XXXVIL, 121 seq.; Janssen-PastoR, 
in.,1* 562 seq. ; POSTINA, Billick, 41 seq. \ GULIK, Cropper, 44 seq.. 
62 seq.., 86 seqq. ; Histor. Jahrb., XXVI IL, 138 seq. 


ance and licentiousness, had for some length of time caused 
serious scandal in Catholic Westphalia by his personal 
conduct and his toleration of Protestant preaching. In 
the beginning of 1543 he solicited admission into the 
Schmalkaldic League.^ The same step was taken by the 
Duke of Julier and Cleves, who since 1541 had been in- 
volved in war with the Emperor's sister, Maria, Regent of 
the Netherlands, on account of the succession to Guelders. 
William, who had been for long under the influence of 
Protestant-minded counsellors, promised the Schmalkaldic 
leaders that he would protestantize his states in return for 
their help against the Emperor. But since Philip of Hesse 
opposed the entrance of the Duke of Julier and Cleves into 
the League, the latter found himself alone when Charles 
appeared in the summer of 1543 with a greatly superior 
force. On the 24th of August, Diiren, the chief stronghold 
of the duchy of Julier, was stormed and the entire country 
overcome. On September the 7th William appeared as 
suppliant at the feet of the Emperor in the camp of the 
latter at Venlo. Charles restored to his conquered enemy 
his ancient inheritance, but compelled him to renounce 
Guelders and Zutphen as well as his alliances with France 
and Denmark and also to cancel his introduction of re- 
ligious innovations into his duchies.^ 

The overthrow of Duke William of Cleves had a decidedly 
reactionary effect on the development of affairs at Cologne. 
There the Emperor personally encouraged the Catholics to 
energetic resistance to the Archbishop's religious changes 
and insisted on Bucer's dismissal. Thereby the great 
danger threatening the Church on the lower Rhine was, if 
not indeed removed, yet substantially diminished.^ 

• See Janssen-Pastor, III.,^^ 560 seq., and Fischer, Die Reforma- 
tionsversuche des Bischofs F. v. Waldeck. Dissert, Miinster, 1906. 
2 See Janssen-Pastor, III.,'^ 570 ^^jr. 3 cf. Culik, 97. 


The Emperor's victory over the Duke of Cleves had, 
however, yet another important result : it opened Charles's 
eyes to the " weakness and political incapacity " of the 
Schmalkaldic group. He perceived, as he relates in his 
commentaries, that henceforward it was no longer simply 
impossible to curb their high spirit by force, but that this 
would be a very easy thing to do if only the attempt were 
made under suitable circumstances and with adequate 
means.^ The Emperor's first requirement certainly was 
the unconditional support of all his subjects in his war 
against France, and thus the Schmalkaldic League had 
experienced once more a brilliant triumph at the Diet of 
Spires. Charles V., however, in his innermost heart dis- 
liked the concessions into which he had been coerced by 
the pressure of necessity ; that he did not intend to adhere 
to them is shown by the secret clauses of the Peace of 
Crespy, by which Francis I. was pledged to give the 
Emperor support in restoring religious unity.^ In this 
way the political situation was shifted in a manner favour- 
able to the meeting of the Council. 

Immediately after the conclusion of peace Charles V. 
and Francis conveyed through the nuncios accredited to 
their courts as well as through their ambassadors in Rome 
the expression of their wish that the Council should soon 
be opened at Trent.^ Before their messages had yet 
reached Rome* Paul III., on his part, had already taken the 
initiative towards summoning the Council, now that the 
peace had cleared the way. 

On the 29th of October 1544 Francesco Sfondrato, who 
had exchanged his former Bishopric of Sarno for the 

* Commentaires, 10 1 ; Bezold, 746. 

2 Cf. supra, pp. 1 89, 200 ; see also BezOLD, 747. 

3 Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 15 seq.; Ehses, IV., 383,0. 1. 
« Ehses, IV., 381, n. i. 


Archiepiscopal See of Amalfi, was sent as nuncio-extra- 
ordinary to the Emperor ^ in order, in the first instance, to 
be the mouthpiece of the Pope's congratulations on the 
peace, but also to point out that one of the most important 
fruits of that peace was the possibility now opened of 
summoning and holding the Council. He was once more 
to represent to the Emperor all the efforts which the Pope 
had made to hold the Council up to its last suspension and 
the great necessity of holding the Synod, and then to 
announce that Paul III. now wished to remove the suspen- 
sion and to enter upon the Council without delay. There- 
fore he besought his Majesty to co-operate with the Pope^ 
especially by the despatch of the prelates of his Empire to 
Trent ; the Emperor, on the other hand, ought to prevent 
the discussion of religious questions at the forthcomir^ 
Diet of Worms ; no Legate also would represent the Pope 
in that assembly. With regard to the seat of the Council 
his Holiness was averse to any change of place, notwith- 
standing the inconveniences which had arisen at Trent 
and his own inability to proceed thither, as an alteration 
on this point would only give occasion for fresh difficulties 
and delays. On the 31st of October, Girolamo Dandino, 
with similar instructions, went as nuncio to the court of 
Francis I.^ 

On the 7th of November the French ambassador, 
George d'Armagnac, Bishop of Rodez, read aloud in con- 
sistory a letter of Francis I. of the 28th of October, in 
which, among other requests, he asked the Pope to open 
the Council within three months and certainly in Trent or 

* His instructions, ibid.^ 380-382. For his mission, cf. also Merkle, 
I., 421, n. 5; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 8 seq. Contrary to Friedens- 
burg's supposition that Sfondrato left in the first days of November, 
Ehses finds Oct. 29 as the date of his departure. 

2 Cf. Ehses, IV., 3S0, n. I ; Campana, 358. 


the place that seemed most suitable to the Emperor and the 
King.^ About the same time, after Sfondrato's departure, 
a letter was also received from the nuncio in France which, 
at the King's command, communicated in similar terms the 
position of the latter on the conciliar question ; there was 
also a letter from Poggio announcing what Granvelle, in 
the Emperor's name, had pronounced on the matter.^ 

As soon as the Pope was assured of the agreement of 
the two sovereigns, on November the 14th the unanimous 
assent of all the Cardinals was given in consistory to the 
removal of the suspension of the Council and the fresh 
proclamation of the same on the 25th of March 1545.^ 
The final decision and the issue of the new Bull of sum- 
mons took place in consistory on the 19th of November;* 
in place of the 25th of March, as intended, the fourth 
Sunday in Lent, the 15th of March 1545, was fixed for the 
date of opening. In the same consistory Cardinals Cupis, 
del Monte, Carafa, Parisio, Cervini, Guidiccioni, Crescenzi, 
Cortese, Pole, together with Grimani and Morone, who 
were temporarily absent, were deputed to attend to the 
affairs of the Council.^ In a Bull also dated the 19th of 

* Extract from the Consistorial Acts of Nov. 7, 1544, in EhseS, IV., 
382 seq. 

2 Cf. Farnese's letter to Poggio of Nov. 14, 1544 {ibid., 383, with 
n. 5). Francis I., however, was not, as later events showed, sincere, 
when in the period immediately after the conclusion of peace he 
displayed so much zeal for the Council {cf. ibid., 384, n. 2 ; PASTOR, 
Reunionsbestrebungen, 297). 

3 Farncse reported on this to Poggio on Nov. 14, 1544 (EhseS, IV., 
384 seq.\ and to Morone on Nov. 17, 1544 {ibid.). 

* The text of the Bull "Laetare Hierusalem" of Nov. 19, 1544 {ibid., 
385-388). On the circumstance of the two decisions in the consistories 
of Nov. 14 and 19, cf. ibid., 383 seq., n. 6, with reference to Friedens- 
burg's statement in Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 16. 

* Extract from the Consistorial Acts in EhseS, IV., 385. 
VOL, XII, 14 


November^ Paul III. renewed his earlier decree on the 
Papal election in case his death during the Council should 
render such a measure necessary. The publication of the 
Bull of summons followed on the 30th of November.^ On 
December the 3rd all bishops of all nationalities absent 
from Rome were summoned thither for the Epiphany.* 

In a consistory on the 6th of February 1545 the 
following were appointed conciliar Legates : the Cardinal- 
Bishop Giovanni Maria del Monte, the Cardinal-Priest 
Marcello Cervini, and the Cardinal-Deacon Reginald Pole,^ 
On the 22nd of February the Legatine crosses^ were 
distributed, whereupon Cervini left Rome on the 23rd and 
del Monte on the 24th of February.® Pole remained in 
Rome some time longer through fear of the machinations 
of Henry VIII., and rejoined the others later.^ The Bull 

> Ehses, IV., 388 seq. 

2 Ehses, IV., 387. For the despatch of briefs to various princes 
partly before and partly after this date, cf. ibid., 384, n. i. For the 
history of the delivery of the Bulls to the Bishops by the metropoli- 
tans, cf. ibid., 389 seqq. ; here also is the mandate of the Bishop of 
Hildesheim, Valentine von Teutleben, of Jan. 12, 1545. 

* Ehses, IV., 384, n. i. Cardinal E. Gonzaga, who hitherto had 
been the worst enemy of Paul III., thereupon thought it expedient to 
make peace with the Pope. Foi the Cardinal's own feelings, cf. his 
**letter to the Duke of Ferrara of Oct. 14, 1544; see E. Gonzaga's 
**Ietter to the Pope of Jan. 7, 1545, and **that of March 3 to Cardinal 
Farnese. Cod. Barb, lat., 5792, f. 112 seq., 135 seq., 143 (Vatican 

* Ibid., 394, n. 2 ; Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 8, n. I ; Massarelli, 
Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 422 seq. 

* Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, L, 151 ; EhSES, IV., 
394, n. 2. 

* Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 152 ; Ehses, IV., 394 
seq.^ n. 2. 

' Massarelli, Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 423; Ehses, IV., 395, n. ; 
Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 8, n. 3. 


of nomination for the Legates of the 22nd of February* 
was sent after them with another of the same date, em- 
powering them, if the worst came to the worst, to hold the 
Council in some other city than Trent and to dissolve 
or continue it^ at their own discretion. Not until the 
27th of April was the brief, antedated at the wish of the 
Legates to the loth of February, got ready. This gave 
them full powers to bestow an indulgence on their entry 
into Trent and on the opening of the Council.^ The 
two Legates who had left for Trent brought with them a 
brief of the 22nd of February for Cardinal Madruzzo of 
Trent* in which he was directed to undertake the necessary 
preparations for the Council. On the 23rd of February 
Bishop Sanfelice of Cava was, as in September 1542, again 
sent to Trent ^ to make arrangements for lodgments and 
commissariat. The secretary of the Council, Angelo 
Massarelli, had left Rome on the 23rd of February with 
the Legate Cervini, but was sent forward by the latter and 
reached Trent on the 6th of March, where he already found 
the Bishop of Cava.^ By a brief of the 6th of March ^ the 
Legates were still further empowered to preside over the 
Council in twos or even singly if the others were absent or 

The two Legates, Cervini and del Monte, reached 
Rovereto on the 12th of March and on the 13th made their 
solemn entry into Trent.^ Besides the Cardinal of Trent 

» Ehses, IV., 393 seq. * Ibid., 395 seq. 

3 Ibid.y 391 seq. * Ibid., 396. 

6 The brief in EhSES, IV., 397. The three following briefs also 
deal with reprovisionment {ibid., 397 seq^. 

6 For his journey and arrival, see his Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, 
I., 152 seqq. 

' Ehses, IV., 398 seq. 

* Described in Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 159. Their 
letter to Farnese from Trent of March 13, in DrUFFEL-Brandi, 18 seqq. 


and the Bishop of Cava they found no other prelates. On 
the 14th the Bishop of Feltre, Tommaso Campeggio, made 
his appearance.^ Under these circumstances the Council 
could not be opened on the i5th.^ On the 23rd of March 
the Imperial orator, Dpn Diego Hurtado da Mendoza,^ 
came, was received on the 26th in the house of Cardinal 
del Monte by the Legates in public audience, and received 
on the following day their answer.* On the 8th of April 
the orators of King Ferdinand, Francesco de Castelalto 
and Antonio Quetta, presented themselves before the 

In the weeks supervening on the date of opening only 
a few more prelates appeared, among them the Bishop of 
Bitonto, Cornelio Mussi,^ and the Abbot Jean Loysier of 
Citeaux.'^ In April a mandate of the viceroy of Naples, 
Pedro de Toledo, give occasion for counter-regulations,^ 
The latter had given orders that of the bishops of the 

* Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. MeRKLE, I., 160; Ehses, IV., 399, n. 3. 
2 Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 160; Diarium, II., ibid.^ 

I., 424 I Ehses, IV., 399. 

^ On Feb. 20 appointed orator and procurator of the Emperor to 
the Council (Ehses, IV., 392 seq.). 

* Comparitio 111. Dni Don Didaci de Mendocia oratoris Caesarei 
in sacro concilio Tridentino, 26 Martii, cum legatorum responsio, 
27 Martii 1545 (Ehses, IV., 399-402); Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. 
Merkle, I., 161-165. Cf. the reports of the Legates to Farnese, of 
March 26, 27, and 30, of their negotiations with Mendoza in DRUFFEL- 
Brandi, 29 seqq. 

6 Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 171 seq. ; Ehses, IV., 408, 
n. I. The mandate from King Ferdinand for the procurators was 
presented by them to the Legates on August 29 (Ehses, IV., 408 seq.). 

' Came on March 24 (Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 162). 

' Appeared with other Abbots of the Order before the Legates on 
April 12 (Ehses, IV., 403 seq., and Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. 
Merkle, I. 173). 

8 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 10, n. 3, 4 ; Ehses, IV., 404-407. 


Neapolitan kingdom only four, to be appointed by him, 
should go to the Council as procurators for the rest. The 
nuncio Poggio had already in March given notice of 
similar intentions on the Emperor's part with regard to the 
Spanish bishops.^ The matter was all the more dangerous 
since Cardinals with Imperial leanings, such as Ercole 
Gonzaga, were dreaming of a deposition of the Pope by 
the Council after the manner of Basle.^ In any case the 
freedom of the Council seemed to be threatened by the 
decrees of the Neapolitan viceroy, since the princes in 
this way might make themselves masters of the Council 
if it lay in their power to reduce hundreds of votes to 
those of a few of their satellites.^ The mandate of the 
viceroy led to the publication of the Bull of the 17th of 
April 1545* by which the prelates were bound, save in 
cases of just impediment, to appear personally at the 
Council, and representation by procurators was forbidden.^ 
In the meantime the Imperial policy with regard to the 
Council had entered once more on its former tortuous path. 
In the proposition, presented by Ferdinand to the Estates 
at the Diet of Worms in the Emperor's name on the 24th 
of March 1545, the Council about to be held certainly 
was not passed over in silence, but on the other hand a 
promise was made that, in the event of the Council not 
having begun before the close of the existing Diet and 

1 Cf. Ehses, IV., 412 seq., n. 6; see also Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 
80, n. 2. 

2 Cf. supra, p. 210, n. 3, the Cardinal's hitherto unknown and very 
characteristic **letter of Oct. 14, 1544. Cod. Barb, lat., 5792, f. 112 
seq., Vatican Library. 

3 Cf. Pallavicini, loc. cit., the letter of Bishop Corn. Mussi to 
Cardinal Santafiora from Trent of April 30, 1545 (Ehses, IV., 412 j^^.). 

* Ibid., 404-406. 

* In the case of the Germans the strict execution of thi.s Bull was 
waived. Cf. ibid., 404, n. 2. 


taken in hand the work of reformation, the Emperor would 
summon afresh the Estates of the Empire, which would 
then enter upon the task of reform themselves.^ In place 
of Verallo, transferred to the Imperial court, Fabio 
Mignanelli, Bishop of Lucera,^ had been appointed per- 
manent nuncio to Ferdinand. When he entered Worms on 
April the 2nd he was confronted by the difficult situation 
which the declaration in the Emperor's proposition had 
already caused. In his audience with Ferdinand on the 4th 
of April he received in reply to his official representations 
on the subject of the Council an evasively reassuring pro- 
nouncement, while Cardinal Otto von Truchsess of Augs- 
burg, with whom he afterwards conversed, put before him 
with urgency^ the danger which threatened if the Council 
were not held at once. On the 7th Mignanelli visited 
Granvelle again, who was vehement in his complaints of the 
letter that had been sent to the Emperor. To Mignanelli's 
suggestion that it only contained fatherly admonitions, 
Granvelle replied that representations of that kind might 
certainly have been conveyed to his Majesty, but that the 
Bishop of Cava had no right to communicate the docu- 
ment to the Catholic princes ; in this way the letter had 
been made known to the Protestants, who were on all 
sides circulating the most scurrilous refutations.* 

The most passionate of these retorts had been written 
at the command of the Elector and Chancellor of Saxony 

» Cf. Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 387. 

* The brief of credence (Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 81-83) contained 
a request that Ferdinand should take steps to inform the Council of 
the nature of any discussions which might arise at the Diet of Worms 
on the question of religion. For the mission of Mignanelli, cf. Nuntia- 
turberichte, VIII., 27 seq. 

3 Mignanelli to Farnese, dat. April 4, 1545 j Nuntiaturberichte, 
89 seq. ; Druffel-Brandi, 34 seq. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 96 seqq. 


by the originator of the religious disruption, now standing 
on the verge of the grave. This was the pamphlet which 
appeared in March 1545 "against the Papacy in Rome, 
founded by the Devil," the most violent effusion of Luther's 
pen. The chief ruler of the Church is here spoken of with 
wearisome iteration as "the most all-hellish father," "his 
Hellishness," and styled " Juggler," " the Ass Pope with long 
asses' ears," " desperate knave," " the destroyer of Christian- 
ity," " Satan's bodily dwelling-place," " the Devil's apostle," 
" the author and master of all sins," " Roman Hermaphro- 
dite" and "Pope of Sodomites." By means of a Council 
the Pope and his followers could not be made better : 
" Since they believe that there is neither God nor hell nor 
a life after this life, but live and die like cow, sow, or any 
other cattle, it is indeed laughable that they should hold 
seal or brief or reformation. Therefore this were best ; 
let the Emperor and the Estates of the Empire tell the 
vicious, scandalous knaves and the cursed dregs of the 
devil at Rome to go to hell for ever ; yet there is no hope 
there that any good will be gained. We must work in 
other ways. Nothing was ever set right by Councils." 
What, however, ought to be done to extirpate " the devil- 
founded Papacy," Luther tells us in the words : " Fall to 
now. Emperor, King, Princes, Lords, and whoever will fall 
to along with you. God brings no luck here to idle 
hands. And first of all take from the Pope, Rome, 
Romandiol, Urbin, Bononia, and all that he has as a Pope ; 
for he has with lies and tricks — ah! what say I, lies and 
tricks ! — he has with blasphemies and idolatry shamefully 
filched, robbed, and robbed from the Empire and trampled 
them under foot, and therefore has he led to their reward 
in the eternal fire of hell countless souls through his 
idolatry and destroyed Christ's kingdom, wherefore he is 
called an abomination of desolation. Therefore ought he 


the Pope himself, his Cardinals and all the rabble of his 
idolatry and Papal holiness, to be taken and as blasphemers 
have their tongues torn out from the back of their necks 
and nailed in rows on the gallows just as they attach their 
seals in rows to their Bulls. Yet what a trifle is this 
compared to their blasphemy and idolatry ! Therefore let 
them hold one Council, or as many as they please, on the 
gallows in hell, deep below all devils." 

The contents of Luther's scurrilous libel correspond with 
the frontispiece, which represents the Pope on his throne 
in priestly robes but having asses' ears and surrounded by 
devils, who are crowning him from above with a scavenger's 
bucket and from below are dragging him down to hell.^ 

At the same time Calvin composed, in the form of forty- 
seven scholia on the Papal letter, a violent pamphlet 
against Paul III.^ Johann Sleidan, once a French spy, 
afterwards the historian of the Schmalkaldic League, 
published two addresses to the Emperor and the Empire 
in which he called for measures of force against the Pope, 
who is identified with Antichrist.^ 

Undisturbed by the indignation displayed by the 

* Cf. Janssen, Ein zweites Wort an meine Kritiker, 99 seq.\ EhSES, 

IV., 373, n- 4. 

2 Admonitio paterna Pauli III. R. P. ad invict Caes. Carolum V. 
. . . cum scholiis, 1545 {cf. Druffel, Karl V., I., Zo seq.). Although 
Druffel says of Calvin's scholia, "They are in many places not merely 
sharp and incisive but coarse and foul," he yet in many respects makes 
himself the accomplice of the Genevan reformer and discharges the 
lattei-'s scholia like barbed arrows against Paul III. and previous Popes. 
Ehses retorts in the Wissenschaftlichen Beilage zur Germania, 1900, 
No. 16, and in Cone. Trid., IV. 373, that Calvin in matters of exact 
knowledge is not the man behind whom an historical inquirer of the 
present day ought to take shelter (see also Merkle, I., 174, n. 4). 

2 Sleidanus, Zwei Reden, neu herausgegeben von E. Bohmer, 
Tubingen, 1879; (^f- Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 591 seq. 


Catholics and even the Emperor at the scandalous 
writings of Sleidan and Luther, the Protestants had these 
and other poisonous pamphlets and vulgar caricatures of 
the Pope distributed in the Diet. These proceedings, as 
well as their unconditional rejection of the Council, show 
how powerful they already felt themselves to be.^ The 
situation was made worse by many on the Catholic side 
casting doubts on the sincerity of the curial efforts to 
bring about the Council.^ To the remonstrances of 
Granvelle, who, opposed to the nuncio in this respect, had 
also called attention to the fact that since the notification 
of the resumption of the Council no further communica- 
tions on the progress of affairs had been made to the 
Imperial ambassador on the side of the Pope, Mignanelli 
replied that Paul III. testified by his action that he 
wished for the Council, but in his report he gave a warn- 
ing that the Curia had better make up for lost time. 
Mignanelli also instructed the Legates in Trent on the 
state of things in Worms ; a letter from him in cipher 
full of details was sent on to Rome by the Legates on 
the 23rd of April.2 

Mignanelli's reports, a warning letter from Cardinal 
Truchsess, and the advice of Cardinal Madruzzo were 
decisive in determining the Pope to yield to the earnest 
desires of Charles and to send Cardinal Farnese to Worms.* 

• Cf. Janssen-Pastor, 590, 592 ; DruSSEL-Brandi, 75 ; Nuntia- 
turberichte, VIII., 98, n. loi, n. 4. See also Wendeler, Luthers 
lilderpolemik gegen das Papstum : Archiv fiir Literaturgesch., XIV., 

16 scqq, 

''■ Mignanelli to Farnese, dat. April 9, 1545; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 
98 seq. ; Druffel, Karl V., I., 41 seq. 

3 Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., gq seq. ; cf. MerKLE, I., 178. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 28, 106, n. 3. For Madruzzo's advice, 
see in Appendix No. 24 Cardinal E. Gor)73ga's *Jetter of March 2?. 
1545 (Vatican Library). 


After Paul III., in a consistory held on the 14th of April 
had given fuller information to the Cardinals concerning 
this important mission, Alessandro left Rome on the 17th, 
So that no attention should be excited in Germany, he 
was attended only by a small suite.^ After Farnese's 
departure a letter reached Rome from the conciliar 
Legates in which they fully set forth that the very 
imminent danger of a national council in Germany in 
consequence of the proposition of the Diet, made the 
early inauguration of the Council at Trent necessary, in 
any case before the close of the Imperial Diet,^ Paul III. 
thereupon on the 23rd, and once more on the 27th of 
April, caused instructions to be sent to the Legates to 
open the Council on the 3rd of May 1545, the Feast of the 
Invention of the Cross. Out of consideration for Farnese's 
mission the command was not made absolute, but left the 
Legates at liberty to postpone the opening in case during 
the interval further information should come from Worms 
which would seem to make this expedient.^ 

Cardinal Farnese travelled very quickly. On the 21st of 
April he was already in Bologna,* and on the 23rd in Mantua, 
where the Regent, Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, discussed with 
him among other matters the failing strength of the Pope.^ 
The same evening the Legate hastened on to Peschiera, 
whence a ship belonging to Cardinal Madruzzo conveyed 

» Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 107, n. ; cf. Campana, 480. 

2 See Druffel-Brandi, 55 seqq. Cf. Pallavicini, 1, 5, c. 10, 
n. 5-8; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 122, n. 2. 

3 Ehses, IV., 411 ; Druffel-Brandi, 65. 
* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 120, n. i. 

^ Cf. \xi App. No. 25 Cardinal E. Gonzaga's *]etter of April 26, 
1 545 (Vatican Library). San Benedetto, which the Cardinal touched 
on his journey and which Friedensburg (Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 
120) cannot identify, is the Abbey of S. Benedetto di Polirone near 


him to Riva. There the latter Cardinal and his two Legatine 
colleagues awaited him and in their company he entered 
Trent on the 25th.^ Just as he was on the point of setting 
forth again on the 28th of April the order for the opening 
of the Council reached the Legates. Farnese, however, was 
successful in persuading the latter of the necessity of 
deferring this event until he had had speech with the 
Emperor. Since Mendoza also and the Cardinal of Trent 
were in agreement with Farnese, the Legates followed their 
advice and reported on the matter on the same day to 
Cardinals Santafiora, Cervini, and Morone.- Farnese also 
at the very moment of departure wrote to the Pope upon 
the subject.^ 

On May the 3rd the Legates called the ten bishops,* 
who up till then had appeared in Trent, to a meeting and 
communicated to them the Papal orders and their reasons 
for temporary delay, on which all were agreed.^ The Pope 
ordered Cardinal Santafiora to write ^ to the Legates on 
the 4th of May with his approval of the postponement, but 
on the 2 1st communicated to them instructions that as 
soon as they were informed from Worms of the Emperor's 

^ Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 120 seq.; Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. 
Merkle, I., 179. 

2 Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 180, under date of April 
28; Druffel-Brandi, 66 seq., 68 seq. Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 11, 
n. 4, 5. 

' Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 133, n. i. 

* They were the Bishops of Cava, Feltre, Cadix, Pesaro, Piacenza, 
Accia, Majorca, Bitonto, Belcastro, and Bertinoro. 

^ The accounts of this assembly in Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. 
Merkle, I., 183, and in Ehses, IV., 413. Letter of the Legates to 
Santafiora of May 4 in Druffel-Brandi, 80 seq. A memorial of the 
Bishop of Feltre on the question of the opening of the Council and 
other matters brought before the Bishops by the Legates in the 
assembly of May 3, in EhseS, IV., 414-417. 

® Druffel-Brandi, 82 seq. 


consent to the opening of the Council they were to proceed 
thereto without delay and without waiting for a fresh 
Papal mandate.^ That the Pope at this time assumed 
that there would be only a short interval of delay is 
proved by the fact that on the 9th of May he had in- 
structions sent by Cardinal Santafiora to the nuncio 
in France to urge Francis I. to send the prelates of 
his kingdom to the Council at the earliest possible 

Cardinal Farnese reached Brixen on the evening of the 
29th of April 1545. There he met Bellagais, the secretary 
of Cardinal Truchsess, who assured him that King 
Ferdinand, Granvelle, and the Catholics hailed his appear- 
ance at Worms with great joy. A message received from 
Verallo, that the Emperor had rescinded the order for- 
bidding the Cardinals nominated on the 17th of December 
1544 to assume the insignia of their new dignities,^ also 
helped to dissipate any misgivings as to the reception that 
awaited Farnese from Charles and Ferdinand. 

The Cardinal's further progress was not without anxieties 
owing to the danger of his seizure in a Protestant ambus- 
cade. On the advice of Cardinal Truchsess, who had sent 
his only brother to meet him, he abandoned the usual post- 
roads on foot and did not touch Augsburg. In the course 
of his journey Farnese fell in with Niccolo Madruzzo, 
brother of the Cardinal of Trent, who was to accompany 
him until he reached Worms. In DilHngen, which he 

» Ehses, IV., 413, n. 3. 

2 Ibid. On April 29, 1545, this nuncio, Alessandro Guidiccioni, 
reported to Farnese that Francis I. had declared to him that before he 
sent his Bishops to the Council he would await the outcome of the 
Diet of Worms {ibid.., 412). The third conciliar Legate, Pole, entered 
Trent on May 4 (see Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 183 seq. ; 
Ehses, IV., 395, 419)- 

8 Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 133 seq. 


reached on the 5th of May, the Legate found awaiting him 
a messenger from Cardinal Truchsess with urgent entreaties 
to suspend the journey as the Protestant Duke of Wurtem- 
berg was not to be trusted. Farnese and his companion 
were burning with impatience to advance, and the Legate 
thought for a moment of braving the dangers and passing 
through the Protestant Duchy in disguise, but on further 
consideration he decided to choose the safer course and to 
go round the zone of danger. Therefore, under sufficient 
protection, with a guide of King Ferdinand, he made his 
way by Ulm, Scheer, Donaueschingen, and Freiburg to 
Spires and thence to Worms.^ 

When in Ulm the Cardinal had an opportunity of 
catching a glimpse of the Protestant world. The noble 
minster of that city he found to be in the interior " as 
white as a mosque," with a bare, undecorated altar. The 
desolation of this House of God, "as empty as a barber's 
basin," had a profoundly depressing effect on the Cardinal 
and his company. What a difference between this and 
the churches of Italy, richly adorned with works of art ! 
Farnese, who naturally did not disclose himself, visited the 
booksellers' shops in Worms and found there only Protestant 
works. On this occasion he plunged with great boldness 
into religious discussion. On his representing that no one 
had a right to leave the old secure path at the bidding of 
a private person guided by his own passions, he was met 
with the rejoinder that no one should have any other guide 
than the clear words of Holy Scripture; they were perfectly 
sufficient, wherefore a Council was unnecessary. The ani- 
mated counter-propositions of the Cardinal were without 
effect. He had shown so much eagerness on this occasion 
that his companions urged him to use greater caution in 

* Nuntiaturberichte, 139 seqq. ; Kannengiesser, 54, 123 seq. ; 
Druffel-Brandi, 80, 83, 85, 91 


the future; nevertheless, the Cardinal soon afterwards was 
holding discussions, in Catholic places, it must be said, and 
on more than one occasion with a lettered member of the 
Protestant community.^ 

When Farnese entered Worms on the 17th of May he 
had already been preceded by Charles V. The delay 
caused by the Legate's circuitous journey had one good 
result; his appearance in Worms could be accounted for 
simply as bearing on the Diet and the subsidy required 
for the Turkish war. 

Farnese's audience with the Emperor took place on 
the 1 8th of May. Charles made open display of his 
Catholic sentiments; he met, hat in hand, the Pope's 
representative in the foremost reception chamber, and 
when the latter withdrew, the Emperor reconducted him, 
in the same manner, to the door. The reception generally 
was such that in Farnese's opinion he had never before 
been greeted so well as on this occasion. Even if 
Charles V. did not disguise a certain dryness and firmness 
of demeanour, yet, when Farnese touched in a tone of 
apology on former misunderstandings, he remarked that it 
would be better to let bygones be bygones and turn over 
a new page. Further, the Emperor assured him of his 
determination to give his protection to the Holy See and 
the house of Farnese. The Legate's second mandate, like 
the first, met with the best reception. The Emperor offered 
a subsidy of 100,000 ducats for the Turkish war, to be 
deposited for that purpose in Augsburg. Farnese's third 
request was that Charles should support the Council by 
ordering his bishops to participate in it, and that he should 
put a stop to the attempt of the viceroy of Naples to 
substitute a small representative body for the collective 
episcopate of that kingdom and prohibit such attempts 

1 See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 149 ^^1- 


in other parts of the Empire. To this Charles V. gave an 
evasive answer.^ 

Further transactions were carried on by Granvelle, who 
certainly praised the Pope's decision to open the Council, 
but pointed with emphasis to the danger with which 
this step was coupled — the danger of the Protestants 
then breaking up the Diet, of a massacre of Catholics 
in Germany, even of a vindictive enterprise against Rome 
itself; the Emperor alone could make but a feeble resist- 
ance against such an attack, if the German Catholics could 
not be counted on. All depended on the help of the Pope. 

The Cardinal was amazed at these announcements. That 
the Emperor, whose illicit concessions to the Protestants 
in former years had drawn from the Pope the most serious 
remonstrances, should now be seeking an alliance with 
Rome to compass the forcible suppression of these very 
Protestants, seemed to him at first incredible. The cool 
treatment of the affairs of the Council, as well as the 
sudden announcement of the Emperor's extreme fear of 
the Protestants, aroused strong suspicion in the Cardinal. 
He rejoined that the task of getting the better of their 
opponents lay in the first instance with the Emperor, but 
that financial support from Paul III. towards their chastise- 
ment was not excluded. That the Emperor was really in 
earnest in the matter seemed to the Cardinal at first to be 
highly doubtful. His surmise was that Charles in reality 
would go no further than to extract as much money as 

» See Farnese to the Pope and the conciliar Legates, dat. Worms, 
May 22, 1545, in Druffel, Karl V., IL, 57 seq. ; IIL, 62 seq., and in 
the Nuntiaturberichte, VIIL, 160 seq.; ibid., 158 seq. Also a report 
of May 21 on the first impressions. (In Friedensburg, p. 159, line 
10, for "chiesino" marked by a "sic" read "chietino"; it is a term 
for a pious man.) Cf. in Appendix No. 26 Cardinal E. Gonzaga's *!ttLer 
of June 4, 1545 (Vatican Library). 


possible from the Pope under the pretext of a war against 
the Protestants and then, indifferent to the interests of the 
Holy See, would, as he had done before, come to some ac- 
commodation with the Protestant Estates against levying 
the Turkish subsidy.^ 

In the course of the negotiations, however, this misgiving 
vanished. Farnese became convinced that the Emperor's 
plan of armed aggression on the Protestant Estates was 
seriously meant, and that his endeavours to put off the 
Council were only a feint to enable the opening to take 
place with all the greater prestige. The Emperor's pro- 
posal to use force against the Protestants with the Pope 
as his ally would rouse not merely an expectation of the 
restoration in Germany of the deeply injured Catholic 
Church, but also a hope that Charles would uphold the 
Papal authority against that of the Church assemblies 
instead of making himself, as was feared, the champion of 
the movements aimed at the limitation of the Papal power. 
Moreover, there was the prospect of the union between 
Emperor and Pope being also of the greatest advantage 
to the exaltation of the house of Farnese.^ 

The nuncios at Worms, Mignanelli and Dandino, 
could find nothing sufficiently favourable to say in their 
reports to Rome of the tact and sagacity displayed by 
the Cardinal- Legate during the negotiations. Both held 
the view that the Pope under all circumstances must agree 
<vith the Emperor's plan that they should make common 
cause in warfare against the Protestants.^ Even Farnese 

» Thus of May 22, 1545, to the Pope (see Druffel, Karl V., II., 57 ; 
cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 12). 

2 See Farnese's letter to the Pope of May 22, 1545, in Druffel, II., 
57 seq. ; cf. Kannengiesser, 58, and the same in the Festschrift (217 
^eq!) of the Protestant Gymnasium at Strasbourg (i{ 

' Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 169^-^7. 


was of this opinion, but without definite instructions on 
this entirely unexpected proposal, without powers to enter 
into so weighty and far-reaching a scheme, he could only 
give the general assurance that the Pope would support 
with all his might an undertaking of such importance to 
the Church.^ In order by his personal mediation to bring 
to a conclusion so promising a compact between the heads 
of the Church and Empire as well as to keep his great 
secret safe, he resolved to return with all speed to Rome. 
He and his companion Aliprando Madruzzo put on 
German clothes in order to keep up their incognito and 
to escape the machinations of the Protestants, whose 
suspicions were now aroused. In the stormy night between 
the 27tli' and 28th of May the Cardinal left Worms.^ By 
the 2nd of June they were in Trent, where he reported 
to the Legates the success of his mission with regard 
to the Council,^ and on the evening of the 8th of June 
he rode into Rome.* 

Cardinal Farnese brought with him an autograph 
letter from the Emperor in which he announced that he 
had come to a complete understanding with the Legate 
and prayed his Holiness to come to an early decision.^ 
Paul III. at once resolved to accept the Emperor's offers. 
After discussing the important situation with the Cardinals, 
he declared himself prepared to give extensive help. He 
would pledge himself to bank at Venice 100,000 ducats 
in addition to the same amount deposited by Farnese 

* He seems to have gone pretty far in this respect (see Kannen- 
GIESSER, 58 seq.). 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 181. 

3 Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 198-200 ; ESHES, IV., 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 37, 198 ; Campana, 482 
^ Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 183, n. i. 

VOL. XII. 15 


at Augsburg; 12,000 Italian infantry and 500 light horse 
were to be maintained at his cost for four months; 
besides, the half-year's income of the Spanish Church, 
amounting to 400,000 ducats, would be assigned and 
permission given for the sale of the holdings of Spanish 
convents, which would be compensated in other ways, to 
the amount of 500,000 ducats. The Pope was also inclined 
to acquiesce in the postponement of the opening of the 
Council. On the other hand, he demanded that the money 
contributed should be spent exclusively on the operations 
against the Protestant Estates, and that no agreement 
should be concluded with the latter to which the Pope and 
Emperor were not both parties. By the 17th of June 
Farnese was able to communicate these offers to Granvelle. 
The day before he had written to Charles V. that the 
Pope's firm determination to place all his power at the 
Emperor's disposal had filled him with greater joy than he 
had ever experienced before.^ 

Paul III. then ordered preparations for war to be made 
on a vast scale, the objects of which could not be doubted.^ 
The courier despatched on the i6th of June with the 
offers to the Emperor must have travelled with such 
extraordinary speed that on the 23rd he reached Worms.^ 
Evidently the hammer was to strike while the iron 
was hot.* 

The Emperor was all the more delighted with the Pope's 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 37, 198 seqq. 

2 Besides Druffel, Karl V., II., 2^., cf. in Appendix No. 27 
the *letter of Cardinal E. Gonzaga of June 30, 1545 (Vatican Library). 

3 See Druffel, II., 25; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 198 seq.^ 204, 
664, 665 ; Merkle, I., 207, 221. 

* All decisions were suspended until the Emperor's return ; see 
*H. Tiranno, letter from Rome on June 27, 1545, to Urbino (State 
Archives, P'lorence), 


offer as he was in expectation of soon having yet another 
100,000 ducats, making 300,000 in all. He promised to 
expend the Papal contributions only against the Protestants 
and not to make any terms with them to which the Pope 
was not also a party. The Wcir itself he intended to begin 
in the course of the year.^ 

As on the 27th and 28th of June so also on the ist and 
2nd July the nuncios were still able to report that Charles 
was occupied in the preparations for the campaign and 
seeking to form an alliance with Duke William of Bavaria, 
and to lull the suspicions of the Protestants by making 
arrangements for a religious conference. But already on 
July the 4th the nuncios received an intimation that diffi- 
culties had sprung up which might cause the war to be 
put off until the following year.^ 

The more the Emperor pondered over the state of affairs 
the more doubtful it seemed to be that a speedy beginning 
of the war was possible. Although a considerable time 
had passed by he was still hoping for the available ready 
money. In addition to this the negotiations with Bavaria, 
contrary to expectation, were not proceeding favourably .^ 
The Emperor's fears were increased by Ferdinand and 
Granvelle, so that on the 5th of July the postponement of 
the undertaking was a settled affair. On the following day 
the High Steward of the Empire, Johann von Andelot, 
left Worms in order to lay before the Pope by word ot 
mouth the changed condition of things.* 

Andelot had an audience on the 15th of July. He first 
of all set forth the reasons which had compelled the 
Emperor to defer the war until the next year; in the mean- 

• See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 38. 
2 /did., 226 seg. 

2 /did, 41. 

♦ C/. Kannengiesser, 63 ; Nuntiaturberichte, Vill., 227, N 


time measures might be considered for supporting the 
Catholics against the attacks of the Protestants, and a 
written agreement drawn up determining the shares in the 
burden of war to be borne by the Emperor and the Pope. 
In the second place, Andelot begged that the opening of 
the Council might not be premature ; in any case, that the 
Emperor should have previous intimation so that by with- 
drawal from Worms he might escape the dangers threaten- 
ing him from the Protestant side. Andelot pressed his 
requests further : that the Council after its opening should 
at once occupy itself with reform and not with dogma. 
He also asked for the Pope's consent that the Emperor 
should keep the Protestants in check by holding a religious 
conference and summoning a new Diet for the winter 
at which he promised to avoid any encroachments on 
the authority of the Holy See, Finally, Paul HI. was 
asked to take steps against the Archbishop of Cologne, 
who might prove a serious obstacle to the Emperor's 

The Pope, who from the Emperor's communications to 
Farnese and his lavish offers had become firmly convinced 
the outbreak of war was close at hand, was painfully 
surprised by Andelot's announcement ; nevertheless, his 
reply was as accommodating as was possible. He was 
ready for war at any moment, but submitted to the more 
competent judgment of the Emperor with regard to its 
commencement. He was prepared to conclude an agree- 
ment on the basis of his existing offers. The opening 
of the Council, which he would gladly notify to Charles, 
did not admit of longer delay, but the proceedings would 
be such that the cause of religion and the war against the 
Protestants would derive advantage and not prejudice 

* Cf. Farnese's report of July 19, 1545, in Druffel, II., 72 seq., and 
still more correctly in Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 249 seq. 


from them. The best help the Catholics could have would 
be the continued presence of Charles in Upper Germany. 
The Pope on his side would, under any circumstances, 
continue to give them his protection ; he was also willing to 
take summary measures against the Archbishop of Cologne 
even to the length of deposition.^ 

Whilst acceding to the latest wishes of the Emperor, 
Paul III. had hopes that the latter would raise no objec- 
tions to the plan which he had long been maturing of 
conferring upon Pier Luigi Farnese the fiefs of Parma 
and Piacenza. This matter had already been a subject of 
conversation during Cardinal Farnese's sojourn in Worms.^ 
Charles V. would have preferred to see the above-named 
cities bestowed upon his son-in-law, Ottavio Farnese. But 
this did not suit the views of Pier Luigi ; he himself must be 
the master of those fertile territories. It was represented 
to the Pope that Parma and Piacenza were in constant 
danger of being lost in war, and their only security was the 
government of a prince with undisputed authority. Still 
the Pope hesitated before taking the final step. Pier 
Luigi therefore sent to Rome his confidential secretary, 
Apollonio Filareto. The eloquent representations of this 

* The nuncio Verallo was more thoroughly instructed by Farnese 
(see letter of July 19, 1545, mentioned in preceding note) to represent 
at court, opportunely and tactfully, that the treatment of questions of 
the Faith, as the primary cause of the summoning of the Council, could 
not be shelved. On July 26 Verallo had an audience of the Emperor 
in which he acted simply in accordance with Farnese's letter and 
received from Charles in reference to the Council the reply that he was 
satisfied with the opening of the Council, but only wished it could be 
deferred until the Assumption (Aug. 15) or Nativity (Sept. 8) of our 
Lady (Verallo and Mignanelli to Farnese, dat. Aug. 3, 1545, in 
Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 265). 

2 See Affo, Pier Luigi Farnese, 69 seq. ; xVuntiaturberichte, 
VIII., 42. 


agent were at last successful, in the beginning of August, 
in allaying the lingering scruples of the Pope> 

Nothing now remained but to win the consent of the 
Sacred College. This Cardinals Farnese and Gambara 
undertook to do, the latter having been from the beginning 
a warm partisan of Pier Luigi. Everything seemed to be 
settled, and on the 7th of August a final vote was to be taken 
in consistory. Then on the evening of the 6th, just as the 
Pope was retiring to rest, Andelot and Marquina appeared 
on the scene with the announcement that the Emperor 
gave his consent only to the investiture of Ottavio. When 
Paul III. opposed his firm determination not to relinquish 
the cause of Pier Luigi, the representatives of Charles gave 
way to the length of assuring him that they would allow 
the case to proceed in silent acquiescence.^ 

But in the College of Cardinals an objection sprang up. 
Here undoubtedly the ambitious Ottavio had cards to 
play. On the 12th of August the Pope in person brought 
the subject before the consistory. He pointed out that the 
two cities were far too responsible and far too costly a 
possession for the Holy See, he therefore conveyed them 
to Pier Luigi and his heirs as fiefs in return for a yearly 
tribute of 9000 ducats. Pier Luigi was in a position to 
uphold these cities and to give to the Holy See in com- 
pensation Camerino and Nepi, the latter places, on account 
of their situation, being much more important and profitable, 
so that in the end their acquisition would be a gain. The 
opponents were, naturally, not satisfied with such flimsy 
arguments; they wished to know whether the Pope, who 
was only the trustee of the Papal States, had any right to 
alienate portions of their territory. The opposition was so 

* See Aff6, 71 seqq.; cf. Navenne in Rev. Hist., LXXVIII., 
13 seq. 
2 See A. Filareto's report of Aug. 6, 1545, in Aff6, 76 seq. 


vehement that the Cardinals came to no conclusion.^ In 
a second consistory on the 19th of August the treasurer 
produced accounts which showed that the yearly net 
income of Parma and Piacenza only amounted to 7339 
ducats, while those of Camerino and Nepi reached 10,375 ; 
besides, the fortification and garrisoning of Parma and 
Piacenza during the existing pontificate had amounted to 
over 200,000 ducats.2 But even these figures did not con- 
vince the opposition. The Pope in his financial estimates 
might not be altogether at fault, yet the fact stared them 
in the face that a small hill-town like Camerino and a place 
as paltry as Nepi could not be looked upon as more than 
an equivalent for such prosperous and wealthy cities as 
Parma and Piacenza.^ The jest that the Farnese intended 
to take a closet (Camerino) in exchange for two stately 
chambers was not unjustified.* 

The strongest opposition came from Cardinals Cupis 
and Juan Alvarez de Toledo, Archbishop of Burgos. 
Pisani, Carpi, and Sadoleto also spoke against the project, 
but submitted their opinion to the superior judgment of 
the Pope. Trivulzio, Armagnac, and Carafa were far away 
from the consistory, so that the final decision lay with only 
a small group in the Sacred College.^ 

' See Acta Consist, in Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 289, n. I, and 
Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 244. se^. 

2 See *Acta Consist. (Consistorial Archives of the Vatican) ; c/. 
Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 290, n. i. 

3 See in Appendix No. 28 the opinion of Cardinal E. Gonzaga in 
his *Ietter of August 18, 1545 (Vatican Library). 

* The reasons adduced by Manente (p. 293) in excuse of Paul III. 
are not sound, but explicable in a work dedicated to Duke Alessandro 

^ C/. *Acta Consist. (Consistorial Archives of the Vatican) ; 
Pallav;cini, 1. 5, c. 14 ; Aff6, 83 seg. ; Merkle, I., 261. See also 
the *Vita di Paolo III. in Cod. Bolognetti, 209, f. 114'' se^. of the 


A Bull, antedated the 26th of August, decreed the 
incorporation of Can:ierino and Nepi into the States of the 
Church and the investiture of Pier Luigi with Parma and 
Piacenza, these cities being erected into a Duchy.^ Ottavio 
was compensated for the loss of Camerino and Nepi by the 
Dukedom of Castro ; the Prefecture of Rome fell to the lot 
of Orazio Farnese.^ 

The scandalous unconcern with which Paul III. indulged 
his nepotistic instincts on this occasion was shown by the 
fact that the famous Alessandro Cesati was ordered to 
strike a medal the obverse of which represented the naked 
Ganymede supported by the Olympian eagle in the act of 
watering the Farnese lily.^ 

The new allocation of territory brought with it a change 
in the jurisdiction of the Papal States. A new Legation 
was formed comprising Camerino, Spoleto, Terni, Narni, 
and Rieti. This Umbrian Legation was bestowed on 
Cardinal Durante, while Assisi and Citta di Castello 
were transferred to the Legation of Perugia.* 

Secret Archives of the Vatican. The speeches here given are not 
authentic, as Botta (Storia d' Itaha, II., 109) supposes; on the other 
hand, it is quite correct that N. Ardinghello entered into the scheme. 

1 The question was not finally settled until the end of 1545 (see 
AffO, 89 ; Histor. Jahrb., XXIV., 520; Gualano, 71 seq. ; Massig- 
NAN, 58, and Istoria del dom. temp. d. sede ap. nel ducato di Parma 
e Piacenza, Roma, 1720, 353 seq^. 

2 Cf. Navenne in Rev. Hist., LXXVIII., 17 seq. ; for the cession of 
Camerino, see LiLl, 344 seq. 

2 See Armand, I., 172. A fine specimen of the medal in the 
Museum of Parma (see Atti Mod., II., 256, n. 6). Paul III.'s nepotism 
was so great that in October 1545 many persons believed "che il papa 
cerchi di lassarsi un successore" (Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. 
Merkle, I., 290). In August 1546 it was reported that Sfondrato had 
been selected ; see Luzio, V. Colonna, 49 seq.^ and Lupo Gentile, 
Farnesiana, Sarzana, 1906, 10 {Nosze-Publ.). 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 290, a, 


While the courtiers were heaping congratulations on the 
new Duke of Parma and Piacenza and throwing out hopes 
for the acquisition of Milan,^ the opposition were enraged 
at the success of Paul III. in surmounting so many 
obstacles. In a letter of the 23rd of August 1545 to the 
Duke of Ferrara, Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga gave expression 
to his bitter scorn of the " dear old man " who was about to 
raise the new Duke to the thrones of France and Spain, 
and indeed of the whole world. " To us scions of ancient 
princely houses, whose heritage was won by so much effort 
and is with such difficulty maintained, it seems strange 
indeed that so new a prince should spring up like a mush- 
room in the night." ^ Carafa gave nobler expression to his 
deep repugnance to this latest act of nepotism to which 
Paul III. had yielded, to the injury of the Church and the 
temporal power. On the day of the consistory, apparently 
with deliberate intention, he made a pilgrimage to the 
seven principal churches of Rome.^ 

In the face of this arbitrary proceeding of the Pope's, 
the Emperor found his hands tied by a twofold knot. 
On the 27th of August his daughter Margaret had at 
last borne the longed-for offspring of her marriage with 
Ottavio Farnese. It did not therefore become Charles V. 
to protest against a decree which opened up the prospect 
of a Duchy for his own grandson. But a still more 
decisive motive for silence lay in the plan of war against 
his Protestant subjects, towards which the Pope's help was 

* Aff6, 85, who sees in this evidence of Farnese aspirations to Milan. 
See also Brosch, I., 182, on this point. 

2 See text of the *letter in Appendix No. 29 ; cf. also the very 
characteristic **letters of the Cardinal of Aug. 31 and Sept. 5, 154^ 
(Vatican Library, loc. cit.). 

3 See Caracciolo, *Vita di Taolo IV. (Casanatense Library. 
Rome); Bromato, IL, 121 seq. 


indispensable. He therefore accepted the accomplished 
fact without expressing approval or the reverse.* Never- 
theless, the relations of the Pope and the Emperor continued 
for some time to come to be anything but satisfactory. 

The Recess of the Diet of Worms of the 4th of August 
1545, which entirely ignored Council and Pope and 
promised a religious conference, continued, in spite of the 
tranquillizing assurances of Andelot and Vega, to be as 
much as ever an object of mistrust and anxiety ^ to the 
Papal party. There was, further, the difference of stand- 
point from which the question of the Council was regarded. 
This became apparent when Juan de Vega made excuses 
for the Recess to the Pope and at the same time requested 
that the Council should remain suspended throughout the 
whole of September, and that also subsequently, after 
the opening had taken place, no decisions on questions 
of faith should be declared, but that the transactions of 
the Council should be confined to disciplinary matters.^ 
Upon this Paul III. turned the discussion to the question 
of the transference of the Council, which had for so long 
claimed attention.^ As the ambassadors announced that 

> Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 44. 

2 Ibid., 44, 45. 

3 Farnese reported on this to the Legates on Aug. 26, 1545 
(Druffel-Brandi, \%oseq. ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 15, n. 2). 

* The question of transference was also discussed in Trent where, in 
consequence of the prolonged uncertainty whether or where the 
Council would be opened, the position was an uncomfortable one. On 
June 7 the Legates had already written to Farnese, in the memorials 
requested from them, on the question of a transference and had observed 
that if this became a matter of discussion the Emperor's wishes would 
have first of all to be considered (Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 194, 195). 
Pietro Bertano, Bishop of Fano, repeatedly laid before Farnese his 
opinion that the Council ought to be transferred to a place agreeable 
to the Pope: Trent, July 3, 1545 {ibid., 640 seqq.\ July 12, 1545 


they had no powers to deal with this point, Girolamo 
Dandino, Bishop of Caserta, was sent ^ as nuncio-extra- 
ordinary to the Emperor's court in order to obtain clear 
information as to Charles's intention in this respect as well 
as in regard to the war against the Protestants. 

According to Dandino's instructions^ dated the 13th of 
September 1545, he was to propose to the Emperor in the 
name of Paul III. that the Council should be no longer 
deferred, as Charles out of consideration for his plan of 
campaign desired, but opened at once, but in some place 
more convenient for the bishops of all nations, as well as 
for the Pope and Emperor, than Trent with its numerous 
disadvantages. In opposing the reasons adduced in favour 
of a transference to Italy, the predominant consideration 
that weighed for Trent, its suitability for the Germans, was 
no longer taken into account, since the Protestants ex- 
pressly declined to appear wherever the Council might be 
held and the German Catholics also stayed away on the 
plea that, owing to the existing state of disturbance, they 
could not desert their churches. If the nuncio saw any 
inclination on the Emperor's part he was as far as possible 
to secure his consent to the choice of a new place being 
left entirely to the Pope ; but if Charles wished the Pope 

(Ehses, IV., 427, n. I), again on Oct. 5 (Nuntiaturberichte, VIIL, 
648 seqq.). Farnese on July 13 and 14 ordered the Legates to send a 
written opinion on an eventual transference (Druffel-Brandi, 153). 
Through Lodovico Beccadelli the Legates made proposals to the Pope 
and Cardinal Farnese on the question in August (the instructions to 
Beccadelli of Aug. 13 in Druffel-Brandi, 171 seqq.). On July 14 
the Cardinal of Trent, writing to the Legates from Brixen, said that he 
thought that the transference should be brought about through the 
Emperor's influence on the Pope {ibid., 154 seq.). 

' For Dandino's mission, cf. Nuntiaturberichte, VIIL, 314 seqq. • 
Ehses, IV., 430, n. i ; Pieper, 145. 

2 Ir Ehses, IV., 430-432. 


to make some specific suggestion, then Bologna was to be 

Dandino, accompanied by Marquina, secretary to the 
Imperial ambassador Vega, reached the Emperor's court 
at Brussels on the 3rd of October. On the 4th he laid 
his instructions before the Emperor,^ who at once declared 
his objection to a transference, an objection which was 
renewed on the pursuance of the negotiations by the 
regent Figueroa and the Imperial secretary Idiaquez.^ 
On the 7th the nuncios Verallo and Dandino had another 
audience of the Emperor in which the latter went more 
thoroughly into his reasons for opposing the transference.^ 
On the loth the Emperor handed to the nuncios the 
written reply to be communicated to the Pope.* Therein 
he stated fully the grounds of his refusal, but on the other 
hand agreed to an immediate opening of the Council by 
the Pope, althougih he wished that at first there should be 
no discussion of the Protestant heresy. On the 19th 
Marquina, bearing the Emperor's reply to the Pope, 
reached Trent on his journey to Rome and handed to 
the Legates letters from Verallo and Dandino containing 
fuller information concerning the Emperor's position.^ On 
the same day the Legates wrote to Farnese and the Pope.*^ 
They protested strongly against the Emperor's demand 
that the Council should deal only with reform and throw 

> Dandino to Farnese from Brussels, dat. Oct. 5, 1545 (Nuntia- 
turberichte, VIII., 317 seqq.). 

2 Ibid.^ 321, 324 seq. 

3 Verallo and Dandino to Farnese, dat. Oct. 8, 1545 {ibid.^ 330 
seqq.) ; cf. also Dandino to Farnese of Oct. 9 {ibid., 345 seq.). 

•* In Spanish {ibid., 647 seq.). 

' Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 291 seq. 

* The letter to Farnese in Druffel-Brandi, 201 seq. ; that to the 
Pope does not appear to be forthcoming (Merkle, I., 293, n. 3). Cf. 
Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 293 seq. 


the questions of faith into the background, and proposed 
that the Pope should send an answer through the Bishop 
of Caserta to the effect that, since the Emperor was set 
against a transference of the Council, he would proceed to 
open the same forthwith at Trent, but with the freedom 
and in the order which were the prerogatives of that body. 
After the arrival of the Imperial embassy in Rome ' it 
was decided provisionally in consistory on the 30th of 
October that the Council should be opened in any case 
before Christmas, the date to be determined in the next 
consistory.2 This took place on the 6th of November, 
when it was finally settled that the opening should be 
held on the Third Sunday in Advent, December the 
13th; the prelates absent from Trent were to be recalled.^ 
When the news of the great achievement* of the Schmal- 

1 Marquina came to Rome on Oct. 24 (Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 
354, n. 4). On Oct. 26 Farnese wrote provisionally to the Legates that 
the arrival of their opinions had been most welcome (DRUFFEL- 
Brandi, 203 seq.). 

2 Cf. Ehses, IV., 435, n. 5. On Oct. 31 Farnese informed the 
Legates of the decision (Druffel-Brandi, 204 ; also in Massarelli, 
Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 317). They received this on Nov. 7 
(Massarelli, Diarium, ed. Merkle, I., 310). Their reply to Farnese 
of Nov. 8 in Druffel-Brandi, 209 seq. On Nov. 4 Farnese also 
informed the French nuncio Alessandro Guidiccioni (EhSES, IV., 
434 seq.). On Nov. 4, 1545, L. Strozza *wrote from Rome to Mantua : 
" Di novo poco vi e che dire, non si parlando d' altro che del aprir 
questo concilio, del quale si parlera ancora nel consistorio di venerdi" 
(Gonzago Archives, Mantua). 

3 Extract from Consistorial Acts in Ehses, IV., 435, n. 5. Farnese's 
communication to the Legates of Nov. 7, 1545 {ibid., 436); also in 
Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 317 seq. This reached Trent 
on Nov. 13 {ibid., Ehses, IV., 436). On the following day the letters 
were drawn up for those prelates who in the meantime had left Trent 
(Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 319). 

* Cf. Brandenburg, Die Gefangennahme des Herzogs Heinrirh 
von Braunschweig i. I., 1545, Leipzig, 1894. 


kaldic League in capturing Duke Henry of Brunswick 
reached Rome, many believed that the Council would 
be prorogued once more.^ But a letter of Cardinal 
Farnese of November the 2ist^ informed the Legates that 
the Pope remained determined that the Synod should 
be opened on the 13th of December. On the 24th of 
November Farnese communicated the same to Poggio,^ 
and on the 26th to Verallo and Dandino.* A brief of the 
24th of November exhorted the King of Portugal to send 
his prelates.^ On the 27th of November Morone who, as 
Legate, was still in residence at Bologna, was recalled to 
Rome in anticipation of the approaching Council.^ 

At the repeated request of the Legates a special Edict 
of Inauguration was sent to them in a brief dated the 4th 
of December 1545.'' After a congregation on the 7th of 
December of the Cardinal deputies for the affairs of the 
Council, Farnese sent the brief to Trent on the same day ;^ 
it reached that city on the iith.^ At the same time the 
Legates received a brief of the 5th of December which 

' Cf. Ant. Borghesi's report, dat. Rome, Nov. 15, 1545 (State 
Archives, Siena). 

2 In DruffeL-Brandi, 218. For the arrival of the letter in Trent 
on Nov. 27, cf. Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 335 seq. with 
n. 3. 

3 In Ehses, IV., 439. 

* Three versions of the letter from Nov. 24 to 26 in the Nuntia- 
turberichte, VIII., 441 seqq. For Friedensburg's opinion that the 
letter "can hardly have been sent," cf. Ehses, IV., 439 seq., n. 2. 

6 Ehses, IV., 438. 

6 Ibid., 440. 

" Ibid., 442. 

8 The accompanying letter from Farnese to the Legates of Dec. 7 in 
DraFFEL-BRANDi, 233. Cf. also Ehses, IV., 442 seq., n. 3, who 
corrects several mistakes of Druffel regarding the letter. 

» Cf. Massarelli, Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 350^-^7. ; the Legates' 
letter to Farnese of Dec. 12, 1545, in Druffel-Brandi, 236 seq. 


g?.ve permission to the German bishops to be represented 
by procurators on account of the gravity of their position 
and notwithstanding the promulgation of the earlier de- 
cree;^ the execution of the brief lay, however, at the 
discretion of the Legates, who did not, however, publish it, 
but reserved it for use should emergencies arise.^ 

A host of difficulties had now been overcome. All was 
ready for the opening of the Council on German soil and 
in the ancient episcopal city of Trent. The longing of 
many years, the event around which so many baffled 
hopes had centred,^ was on the point of realization. 

1 In Ehses, IV., 443 seq. Cf. Pallavicini, I. 5, c. 15, n. 5 

2 Ehses, IV., 444, n. 2. 

3 Cf. *Seripando's memorandum in his Register, xxi, 131'' (General 
Archives of the Augustinian Order in Rome). 


Transactions and Decrees of the Five First Sessions of 
THE Council of Trent (December 1545 to June 1546). 

On receiving the Papal brief giving orders for the opening 
of the CEcumenical Synod on the 13th of December the 
Legates immediately appointed fasts and processions for 
the 1 2th and proclaimed an indulgence for those who re- 
ceived the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Communion. 
Since the shortness of the time did not permit of the 
observance, in the usual manner, of three previous days of 
fasting and prayer, those who found it impossible to prepare 
for the reception of the Holy Eucharist until the Sunday 
could obtain the indulgence on the following Sunday as 
well as if they fasted on the foregoing Wednesday, Friday, 
and Saturday and then made their communion. On 
the 1 2th of December the procession of the Tridentine 
clergy took place; in the afternoon a congregation of the 
conciliar prelates was held at Cardinal Cervini's lodgings, 
at which Cardinal Monte delivered an address and read 
aloud the brief of December the 4th, whereupon a discus- 
sion ensued on his proposals for the solemnities of the 
opening and the orders for the day of the first session.^ 

1 Herculis Severoli de Cone. Trid. Comment., ed. Merkle, I., 1-4 ; 
Massarelli, Diarium, I., II., ibid., 351, 400 seq., 429 ; Ehses, IV., 445 
seq. Differences arose on the question whether the mandates of the 
Legates should be read aloud. The Bishop of Jaen, Pedro Pacheco, 
at the instigation of the other Spanish prelates, the Neapolitans, and 
some others, demanded this. The Legates indeed declared, with an 


Paul III. in a Bull of the 13th of December^ ordered 
universal intercessions and processions to invoke God's 
protection on the Council and promised a plenary in- 
dulgence to all who took part in these pious exercises or, 
in case of hindrance, ful'fi.lled some equivalent duty, fasted 
on the Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday of the week 
following the promulgation of the Bull, went to confession, 
and on Sunday received the Holy Eucharist. In Rome 
the intercessory processions were held on the 14th, 15th, 
and 1 6th of December.^ 

On the 13th of December, the Third Sunday of Advent, 
the Council of Trent was solemnly opened.^ The Fathers 
assembled with the Legates in the Church of the Holy 
Trinity and thence proceeded in copes and mitres, accom- 
panied by the clergy of the city, in solemn procession, sing- 
ing the Veni Creator Spiritus, to the Cathedral, the choir of 
which had been fitted up as the council hall. Here the senior 
President of the Council, Cardinal del Monte, celebrated 
the solemn Mass of the Holy Ghost and published a plenary 
indulgence for those present. Bishop Cornelio Mussi of 
Bitonto then mounted the pulpit and preached a Latin 

appeal to the procedure of the eighth General Council, that the demand 
was untenable, but at the same time gave way in order to avoid 
dissension over a point of very minor importance {cf. Merkle, I., 
3, 400 ; Ehses, IV., 446, n. 2 ; see also Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 17, where 
misstatements of Sarpi are corrected). The Legates were housed in 
the palazzo Giroldi, destroyed in 1845 (see Zanella, S. Maria di 
Trento, Trento, 1879, 32, and Giuliani in Arch. Trentino, I., 158 seq.). 

> Ehses, IV., 446 seq. The Bull reached Trent on Dec. 28 {cf. 
Massarelli, Diarium, I., under the above date, ed. Merkle, I., 361 seq.). 

2 Massarelli, Diarium, I., under Dec. 17, ed. Merkle, I., 353; cf. 
Ehses, IV., 447, n. 

^ The Acta of the opening session in Ehses, IV., 515-532. Cf 
Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 4 seq. ; Massarelli, Ordo aperitionis Cone. 
Trid., Dec. 13, 1545 {ibid.^ 402-404); Massarelli, Diarium II. {ibid.., J., 
429 seq.) ; Pallavicini, 1. 5, c, 17. 

VOL. XIL 16 


sermon in which he gave his enthusiasm free course, not 
unmarked by faults of bad taste.^ After Cardinal del 
Monte had read the prayers prescribed in the ceremoniale,^ 
Bishop Tommaso Campeggio of Feltre read from the pulpit 
the Bull "Laetare Jerusalem" of the 19th of November 
1544, and the Bull of the 22nd of February 1545 nominat- 
ing the Cardinal-Legates. 

After that Alfonso Zorilla, the secretary and theologian 
of the Imperial ambassador, Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, 
presented a letter of apology from that diplomatist, who 
was detained in Venice by illness, and laid his mandate 
before the Council.^ Finally, Cardinal del Monte gave 
another short address,* declared the Council open with the 
assent of the Fathers, and appointed the 7th of January 
for the second solemn session ; the ceremonies ended with 
the singing of the Te Deum. Present at the opening 
session besides the three Papal Legates, Cardinals del 
Monte, Cervini, and Pole, were Cardinal Madruzzo of 
Trent, four archbishops : Antoine Filheul of Aix, Olaus 
Magnus of Upsala, Pietro Tagliavia of Palermo, and 
Robert Wauchope of Armagh, one-and-twenty bishops, 
five generals of orders, and the ambassador of King 
Ferdinand.^ Of the bishops the most noted were Juan 

1 In Ehses, IV., 521-529. Pallavicini (1. 5, c. 18) devotes an 
entire chapter to a vindication of this sermon against Sarpi's censures. 
On Pallavicini's defence, see Ehses' notes, loc. cit, and Merkle (I., 4, 
n. 3). See also Brischar, I., 149 seq.^ and DE Leva, Le prime sessioni 
del Concilio di Trento : Mem. d. 1st., Veneto, XX., 367 seq. For the 
Cathedral of Trent, see Heider-Eitelberger, Mittelalterl, Kunst- 
denkmaler Osterreichs, I., Stuttgart, 1858, 155 seq. 

2 Ehses, IV., 516. 

3 Ibid., 517 seq. 
* Ibid., S19 seq. 

6 The list of names and those of theologians and other personalities 
present in Ehses, IV., 529-532. 


Pachcco of Jaen, soon afterwards made Cardinal,^ Braccio 
Martelli of Fiesole, Tommaso Campeggio of Feltre, and 
Giacomo Nachianti of Chioggia. Among the generals of 
orders were the Servite, Agostino Bonucci, and the learned 
Augustinian Hermit, Girolamo Seripando. 

The theologians present at the first session included 
four secular priests from Spain ; all the rest were regulars, 
namely, six Dominicans, among them Ambrogio Catarino 
and the famous Domenico Soto, ten Franciscan Observants, 
eight Franciscan Conventuals, five Augustinian Hermits, 
as many Carmelites, and four Servites. On the following 
day the Legates sent to Rome the announcement of the 
opening of the Council and applied for further instructions.^ 

Three general congregations, occupied with the organiza- 
tion and procedure of the Council, formed a preparation 
for the second session.^ In the congregation of December 
the 1 8th the Legates laid seventeen articles before the 

* Together with Pacheco there were nominated Cardinals on Dec. 
16, 1545 {cf. ClACONIUS, III., 707 seqq. ; Cardella, IV., 273 seqq.) : 
Georges d'Amboise, the Portuguese Infant Henry, 1 533-1 537, Bishop 
of Braga, since 1540 of Evora, which, out of consideration for him, was 
raised on Nov. 24, 1544, to the rank of a MetropoUtan see (see Gams, 
99; c/. SCHAFER, Portugal, III., 367 seq.), and the Pope's nephew 
Ranuccio Farnese. The last named, in accordance with the corrupt 
custom of the time, was made Archbishop of Naples in 1544, although 
only fifteen years old. It was quite unprecedented that two brothers 
should sit at the same time in the Sacred College, and Alessandro 
Farnese was displeased at the elevation of Ranuccio (see Massarelli, 
Diarium, I., ed. Merkle, I., 311, 3S7^ 364 .y^^.)- 

2 The Legates to Farnese, dat. Dec. 14, 1545 (Druffel-Brandi, 

3 Cf. for these congregations the Acta in Ehses, IV., 533-546. 
Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 6-16 ; Mass.-irelli, Diarium, I., th'd., 353-367 ; 
Diarium W.Jbid., 430-432; Diarium III., /(5/<i., 469-471 ; Pallavicini, 
I. 6, c. 12. Knopfler in Wetzer and Weltes Kirchenlexicon. X!., 
2nd ed., ''048 seq. 


Fathers dealing with the external order of the Council and 
to be submitted for discussion in the next congregation.^ 
The important question whether dogma or reform was to 
be discussed first in the Council was also brought before 
the Fathers in this first congregation and made the subject 
of debate,^ As differences of opinion manifested them- 
*selves, a decision was for the time being postponed at the 
instance of Bishop Ferreri of Ivrea. In this congregation 
the Portuguese Dominican, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, as 
temporary ambassador of the King of Portugal, announced, 
in an address, the later arrival of orators from that monarch 
and presented his sovereign's letters of the 29th of July 
1545 to the Council and the Pope, which were then read 

At the command of the King of France the Archbishop 
of Aix and the Bishop of Agde laid before the Legates, 
first in the congregation of December the i8th and then in 
that of the 19th, their instructions that the Council should 
not enter upon its deliberations before the arrival of the 
French ambassadors and the rest of the French prelates. 
This ominous suggestion, designed to put a check on the 
business of the Council, was, after previous deliberation with 
the prelates, met, on the 20th of December, by a refusal 
couched in intentionally vague and general terms and 
handed in writing to the two French dignitaries. The 
Council, it said, would always show becoming considera- 
tion for the King of France, as far as God's honour and 
that of the Synod permitted; but his Majesty, knowing 

1 The text in Ehses, IV., 533 seq., and in Massarelli, Diarium I., 
ed. Merkle, I., 354 seq. 

* Ehses, IV., 534; Massarelli, Diarium II., III., ed. Merkle, I., 
430, 469. 

3 Ehses, IV., 534-536 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 7 ; Massarelli, 
Diarium, ibid., 354, 430, 469 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. i. The letter 
.)f King John of Portugal in EhSES, IV., 425-426. 


that the sessions of the Council admitted of no further 
delay, was requested to hasten the attendance of his repre- 
sentatives and bishops.^ 

Since the discussion of the article presented on the 1 8th of 
December concerning the formal procedure of the Council 
led to no practical result,^ in a congregation on the 22nd 
of December a commission consisting of the three bishops, 
of Ivrea, Cava, and Feltre, and the Auditor of the Rota, 
Pighini, was formed to deal with the matter first of all with 
the Legates, and then to report to the general congregation.^ 
Although the above named declined to serve, the three 
bishops were re-elected in the next general congregation 
of the Council on the 29th of December for a term of three 
months.* On December the 22nd the question of the right 
to vote belonging to abbots and generals of orders ^ had 
been left undecided. At the two next general congre- 
gations, on the 29th of December 1545® and the 4th of 
January 1546,'^ the subject came under discussion again. 
Opinions were widely divergent; some wished the voting 
to be vested exclusively in the bishops, others wished the 
decision to be deferred until the Council were more largely 
attended. Cardinal del Monte carried the point that the 

^ Cy] Ehses, IV., 536^'^^.; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 7-9; Massarelli, 
Diarium, ibid.^ 358 seq., 431, 470 seq. ; PALLAVICINI, 1. 6, c. i, I. The 
Legates' reports are in Druffel-Brandi, 251 seqq. 

^ The vote of Bishop Tommaso Campeggio of Feltre on this in 
Ehses, IV., 539. 

3 Ehses, IV., 538 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, L, 9. 

* Ehses, IV., 540; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 10, 12; Massarelh, 
Diarium, t'did., 362, 431, 471. 

^ Ehses, IV., 538 ; Massarelli, Diarium, ed. Merkle, I., 431, 471. 

6 Ehses, IV., 541 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 10 seq. ; Massarelli, 
Diarium, th'd., 471. 

^ Ehses, IV., 543 seq. ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 16; cf. especially 
the note in Merkle, I., 1 1 se^., and Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 2. 


right to vote of the generals of orders should be recognized. 
After long discussion, and likewise on the motion of del 
Monte, it was decided in the case of abbots that the three 
Benedictine abbots sent by the Pope should have one vote 
collectively, not as abbots but as representatives of their 

In the general congregation held on the 4th of January, 
the senior President, del Monte, informed the Fathers more 
fully of a letter of Farnese of the 31st of December,^ by 
which the Pope approved of what had been done and 
ordered the Legates to deal in the first instance with 
matters of faith ; in so doing, however, only the doctrines 
and not the persons of heretics were to be condemned, 
a measure which aimed at conciliating the Protestants.^ 
Further, the brief of the ist of January 1546^ was read 
aloud, by which the Fathers in attendance at the Council 
were freed from contributions and permitted to draw upon 
their incomes. Later came up for recital and approval 
the decree appointed for publication in the second session, 
whereupon there arose, as was subsequently again repeated, 
a debate on the style and title of the Council.^ Several 
Fathers proposed in particular that to the title " Sacrosancta 
Tridentina Synodus " the clause used by earlier Councils, 

* In Druffel-Brandi, 255-259. Cf. Ehses, IV., 542 ; Severoli, 
ed. Merkle, I., 12 ; Pallavicini, 1. 5, c. 16, n. 2. 

* The Council consented. " De cette mani^re," says Maynier 
(p. 285), "le concile ne refusait pas aux protestants le droit de se 
defendre, puisque leurs livres seuls, et non leurs personnes, se trou- 
vaient en cause, et on pouvait repondre, k ceux qui lui reprochaient de 
juger des accuses sans les avoir cites et convaincus, qu'il n'y avait 
d'autres accuses que des ouvrages r^pandus partout." 

8 In Ehses, IV., 545 seq. ; cf. Severoli in Merkle, I., 12 ; Mas- 
sarelli, Diarium, ibid.^ 366, 432. 

* Cf. Ehses, IV., 543 ; Severoli, ed. MeRKLE, I., 14 ; Massarelli, 
Diarium III., ibid.., 471 ; Pallavicini, L 6, c. 2, n. 8-10. 


"universalem ecclesiam repraesentans," should be added. 
This proposal met with special opposition from Cardinals 
del Monte and Madruzzo. The first showed that it was 
uncalled-for to imitate thereby the precedents of Constance 
and Basle; the latter pointed out that this magniloquent 
title would only irritate the Protestants. The majority 
were in favour of rejecting the additional clause. Finally, 
on the 4th of January, certain conciliar officials were elected,^ 
while some wished their nomination and appointment to 
proceed from the Pope, to which proposal some of the 
Fathers, zealous in their defence of the prerogatives of the 
Council, raised objection.^ Paul III. had at first looked 
to the humanist Marcantonio Flaminio to be secretary to 
the Council ; as the latter declined, the post was given 
provisionally on the 4th of January to Angelo Massarelli, 
hitherto private secretary to Cardinal Cervini, until the 
Council, which claimed for itself the right of appointment, 
should come to a final decision. Since Luigi Priuli, who, 
it would appear, had been chosen by the Council in the 
beginning of February, did not take up the office, Massarelli 
continued to hold it, and was tacitly recognized as secretary.^ 

* Cf. Ehses, IV., 544 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, L, 14 seq. ; 
Massarelli, Diarium, ibid., 432, 471. 

2 Cf. Ehses, IV., 542 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 12 seq. ; cf. also 
Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. I, n. 2-9. For still later objections, see Merkle, 
I., 18, n. 2. 

2 See for this Merkle, I., xxxi seq., who gives passages from the 
correspondence of the Legates with Farnese relating to the election of 
the secretary. Merkle (I., Ixviii seqq^ devotes pages to a close 
examination of Massarelli, concerning whose life and numerous 
writings a variety of opinions has been held. He comes to several 
new conclusions. He defends the secretary of the Council against 
Druffel's charges of falsehood, with complete success (p. Ixxx seqq.\ but 
on the other hand opposes the attempts of the Italian party to canonize 
Massarelli's reputation. 


On the Pope's nomination Achille de' Grassi was appointed 
consistorial advocate ; the post of abbreviator was given 
to Ugo Boncompagni, noted for his great knowledge of 
canon law.^ 

On the 7th of January 1546 the second session of the 
Council was held in the Cathedral of Trent.^ It was 
opened by Bishop Juan Fonseca of Castellamare saying the 
Mass of the Holy Ghost and Bishop Coriolano Martirano 
of S. Marco preaching a sermon.^ After the usual prayers 
and ceremonies the secretary, Massarelli, read aloud an 
impressive exhortation from the Legates to the Fathers,* 
composed by Cardinal Pole. In eloquent terms this 
document described the corruption of the Church and 
exhorted the Fathers to amendment and contrition of 
heart, whereby alone they could expect the descent of 
the Holy Spirit upon them. Especially urgent was the 
entreaty to expel all passions which can darken the reason, 
and never to lose sight of the sacred things of God by 
espousing the interests of the world.^ The Bishop of 
Castellamare then ascended the pulpit in order to read 
the Bull of April the 17th, 1545, forbidding Bishops to be 
represented at the Council by procurators, the brief of 
December the 4th at the opening of the Council,^ and lastly 

1 Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. I, n. 23 ; Ehses, IV., 544, n. 4. Achille de' 
Grassi arrived in Trent on March 4 (Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. 
Merkle, I., 509). 

2 The Acta in Ehses, IV., 547-564. Cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 
16-18; Massarelli, Diarium I.-III., ibid., 367 seq., 432, 472; 
Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 5. 

3 In Ehses, IV., 557-561. 

« Admonitio ilimorvim iggatorum ac patres concilii (Ehses, IV., 548- 

° Ehses, IV., 548 seq. ; cf. de Leva, Le Prime Sessioni, 372 seq. 

6 For the form in which the brief of Dec. 4, 1545, was read aloud, cj. 

Ehses, IV., 442 seq., n. 3, 446, r. l. 'Oel Morte on the first reading' 


a decree on the blamelessness of life required of the Fathers. 
The last was approved unanimously ; but the " placets" of 
nine Bishops were accompanied by protests against the 
omission in the title of the words " universalem ecclesiam 
repraesentans." ^ Bishop du Prat of Clermont, on the other 
hand, made complaint that in the decree the name of the 
King of France was not expressly mentioned together with 
that of the Emperor. Besides the three Legates and the 
Cardinal of Trent there were present four archbishops, 
six-and-twenty bishops, three abbots, and five generals of 

In the interval between the second session and the 
third, appointed for the 4th of February, the position of 
the Legates towards the Pope and his Council had begun 
to be one of difficulty. General congregations were held on 
the 13th, 1 8th, 22nd, 26th, and 29th of January and on the 
3rd of February.^ As in the first congregation, so in that 
of the 13th of January, the title of the Council gave rise to 
prolonged debate. The Legates, mindful of the opposition 

in the general congregation of Dec. 12 had omitted the words of the 
original text, "juxta formam litterarum indictionis nostrae," as he was 
afraid that the Bull on the prohibition of the Procurators might be 
prejudiced thereby. In their letter to Farnese of Dec. 14 the Legates 
urged this danger, and on Dec. 30 received accordingly a new version 
of the brief, in which the words "juxta formam litterarum nostrarum" 
were substituted for those objected to by the Legates. In this form 
(as also given by Ehses, IV., 442) the brief was read out on Jan. 7. 

* Ehses, IV., 556. The individual contrary votes were noted down 
by Massarelli on a single sheet of paper discovered by Merkle and 
given by him, p. 18, n. i. Cf. also Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 5, n. 4. 

2 The list of those and of others present in Ehses, IV., 561-564. 

3 See the Acta in Ehses, IV., 565-578 ; also Severoli, ed. Merkle, 
I., 18-27; Massarelli, Diarium I., ibid.^ 368-399; Diarium W.^ibid., 
432-434; Diarium III., ibid., 472-476; PALLAVICINI, 1. 5, c. 6-8; 
Knopfler in Wetzer und Welte, Kirchenlexicon, XI., 2nd ed., 


shown in the previous session, wished to bring the question 
to a final issue. They spoke against the addition " uni- 
versalem ecclesiam repraesentans." Cervini addressed the 
Fathers at great length,^ followed by Madruzzo and Pacheco, 
who in this session appeared for the first time with the 
insignia of a Cardinal ; then the Bishop of Astorga spoke, 
and also finally the Augustinian Seripando. 

The last-named succeeded in silencing the opposition. 
Seripando pointed out in particular that there was no ques- 
tion of excluding that designation for ever; it was only a 
postponement until a larger attendance of members and the 
passing of important decrees gave a semblance of propriety 
to so pretentious a title. The opposing Bishops declared 
that they would not be fully satisfied until it was agreed 
that in future the words " oecumenical " and " general " 
should be inserted in the Decree, expressions already 
made use of by the Pope in his Bull of Convocation.^ 

These more formal controversies were trifling in com- 
parison with the disputes occasioned by the very important 
question whether the Synod should begin with decisions on 
dogma or with disciplinary measures of reform. Paul III. 
wished for the former, Charles V. for the latter. 

The primary consideration with the Emperor was the 
avoidance of offence to the Protestants, who would be em- 
bittered by the rejection of their new tenets at the outset of 
the Council ; together with this he nourished a strong dis- 
trust of the Pope's intentions with regard to reform. The 

* A fuller extract from Cervini's speech in Massarelli, Diarium I. 
ed. MWKLE, I., 374-377- 

2 Ehses, IV., 565 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 18-20. In Massarelli, 
Diarium II., III. {ibid., 433-472) it says "universalis et cecumenica" 
instead of "cecumenica et generalis"; the latter words are used in 
the title of the Decrees of subsequent sessions. In the general 
congregation of Feb. 3 the protest of three Bishops was again 
renewed (Ehses, IV., 578 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 27). 


latter started with the view that in accordance with ancient 
custom and the nature of the case, the safeguards of dogma, 
as the things of most importance, should first be settled. 
Paul III, also looked upon it as preposterous that instead 
of appearing as the accuser he should, of his own free will, 
place himself in the position of the accused, in order that in 
the meantime the contumacious might go unpunished while 
he submitted himself, as if they were the judges, to their 
criticism. Finally, he was afraid that the immediate treat- 
ment of the reform question by the Bishops would lead to 
a repetition of the occurrences of Constance and Basle.^ 

Weighty reasons could be adduced in favour of the 
Pope's standpoint, above all the usage of the ancient 
councils. The Imperial ambassador Mendoza, himself an 
expert in canon law, acknowledged this.^ Besides, it was 
clear to everyone that not only the morals of the Catholics 
stood in need of improvement, but that the faith of Christen- 
dom, so violently attacked, demanded protection. Notwith- 
standing, when the Legates endeavoured to carry out the 
Pope's wishes at Trent they met with passionate resistance. 
Already in the general congregation of the i8th of January 
1546, and afterwards in that of the 22nd, the debates were 
long and violent.^ That reform should take the first 
place was urged especially by the Cardinal of Trent.* 
The opposite standpoint was championed by Cardinal 
Pacheco and the Archbishop of Aix. The Bishop of 

» Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 6, c, 7. 

Cf. MAYNIEJi, 237. 

3 Acta in Ehses, IV., 567-572 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 20-24 ; 
Massarelli, Diariuan, ibid., 379 seq., 382-384, 473 seq. ; PALLAVICINI, 
1. 6, c. 7. 

* In the congregation of Jan. 18, the Cardinal of Trent, in the name 
of the Bishop of Capaccio, proposed that the Protestants should be 
once more invited. The proposal was rejected. (Massarelli, Diarium, 
ed. Merkle, I., 380, 433, 473.) 


Feltre, Tommaso Campeggio, brought forward on the 
1 8th of January a proposal for a via media, that dogma 
and reform should be dealt with simultaneously.^ As the 
Legates saw no possibility of carrying a resolution in the 
sense of the Papal instructions, they fell in on January the 
22nd with the proposal of the Bishop of Feltre, whose reputa- 
tion stood very high. Although Madruzzo still continued 
his opposition, the Legates were successful in carrying 
through the compromise of the Bishop of Feltre which 
was to be published as a decree at the next Session.^ 

Paul III., however, was in no way disposed to consent. 
On the 26th of January the Legates received a letter from 
Farnase dated the 21st and 22nd of January insisting on 
the Pope's determination that the treatment of matters 
of faith should have pMority. The Legates, therefore, in 
order to gain time, put the question on the same day to 
the general congregation whether the date of the session 
might not be postponed, as the matters intended for pub- 
lication then were not sufficiently advanced ; no such 
decision, however, was reached. On the other hand, in the 
general congregation of the 26th an important resolution 
of another kind was carried. The negotiations as hitherto 
conducted had revealed the want of a settled order of 
business and of uniform guidance. Among the various pro- 
posals made in this respect, one at last which the Legates 
brought forward carried the day. It provided that the whole 
number of the Fathers should be divided into three separate 
classes, each of which should sit under the presidency and 
in the house of one of the three Legates, and prepare the 
agenda to be presented to the general congregation. ^ 

1 His vote in Ehses, IV., 568 seq. 

2 See Ehses, IV., 571- 

3 See Ehses, IV., 572 ; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 24 ; Massarelli, 
Diarium I., ibid., 392. 


In the meantime the Legates were endeavouring, in 
repeated despatches to Rome, to justify the resolution of 
January the 22nd as unavoidable, and thereby to gain the 
Pope's approval.^ In the short period remaining before 
the day of the session, the 4th of February, they could not 
hope to obtain this. Moreover, on the 30th of January 
they received once more a letter from Farnese dated the 
27th, according to which the Pope's intentions were in- 
flexible.2 Consequently, after previous understanding with 
Cardinals Madruzzo and Pacheco ^ on the same 2nd 
of February, when the three separated congregations 
met jointly for the first time, they brought forward the 
proposal that the decree appointing the simultaneous 
treatment of dogma and reform should not be published 
in the forthcoming session, nor for the present at all, but 
be reserved until the attendance at the Council had be- 
come more numerous. In the general congregation held 
on the following day it was resolved, in spite of the 
violent opposition of the Bishops of Badajoz and Astorga, 
that the decree should not be published at the session on 
the morrow, but be treated from henceforward as if it had 
been enacted.* The Legates were now able to make this 
concession, since on the very evening of February the 2nd 
they had received a letter from Farnese dated the 30th of 
January according to which the Pope consented that the 
resolution of January the 22nd should not be withdrawn ; 
only, the Legates were to take heed that the treatment 
1 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 7, n. 14-16 ; Merkle, I., 399, n. 8. 

* Druffel-Brandi, n. 312. 

3 On Feb. i {cf. Massarelli, Diarium I., ed. Merkle, I., 369 ; cf. 
Ehses, IV., 544 seq.., n. 4). The general congregation which should 
have met on Feb. i was, on the receipt of the letter of Jan. 27, post- 
poned, in order to gain time. 

* Ehses, IV., 575-578; Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 26 seq. ; Massa- 
relli, Diarium I., ibid.^ 433 seq., 475 seq. ; Pallavicini, I. 6, c. 8, r. C, 7. 


of matters of faith should still be considered of primary 

As nothing else had been prepared for the session, 
which nevertheless was now bound to be held, it was 
resolved to publish only two decrees, the first of which 
should declare the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed to 
be the common foundation of all Christian belief and the 
presupposition on which all future definitions of faith must 
depend ; the second, out of regard for the prelates whose 
attendance at the Council was still expected, should fix 
the ensuing session for the Thursday following " Laetare " 
Sunday, which would fall on the 8th of April.^ 

On the following day, the 4th of February 1546, in 
the third solemn session,^ at which the Archbishop, Pietro 
Tagliavia of Palermo, said Mass and the learned Dominican 
Ambrogio Catarino preached,^ these resolutions were ac- 
cordingly passed. Only the Bishops of Fiesole, Capaccio, 
and Badajoz handed in written protestations against the 
omission of the phrase " ecclesiam universalem repraesen- 
tans," while the two latter also objected to the non-publica- 
tion of the decree of the 22nd of January,^ Present at the 
session were the five Cardinals, six archbishops, six-and- 
twenty bishops, four generals of orders, and three abbots. 

» Ehses, IV., 578, n. I ; Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 7, n. 16. 

2 Ehses, IV., 577 ; Severoli and Massarelli, loc. cit. 

s The Acta in Ehses, IV., 579-588. Cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 
27 seq. ; Massarelli, Diarium II., III., ibid.^ 434, 476 seq. ; Palla- 
VICINI, 1. 6, c. 9. 

4 In Ehses, IV., 582-586. 

* These protests called forth from the Legates in the next general 
congregation on Feb. 8 another complete vindication of their previous 
proceedings (Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 28 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 6, 
c. II, n. 1-3). The Bishop of Fiesole, notwithstanding his protest 
against the omission of the additional clause, also renewed his opposi- 
tion to the decrees of the following sessions. 


According to the resolution of the general congrega- 
tion of January the 22nd, letters in the name of the Council 
were to be addressed to the Pope, the Emperor, and the 
Christian princes thanking them for the goodwill hitherto 
manifested by them, and praying them to send a greater 
number of prelates. When these documents came up for 
recitation in the general congregation of the 29th of 
January, strong differences of opinion were revealed ; in 
particular, a dispute arose over the precedence of the King 
of France or of the King of the Romans at the reading 
aloud of the letters in the session. As no agreement was 
reached, the reading of the letters and their approbation in 
the session was deferred, and also their despatch.^ 

After the business under preparation had been settled 
and the order of procedure laid down in essentials,^ the 
Council after the third session entered upon its active 
labours, and accomplished in the course of a year, up 
to the transference to Bologna, a considerable portion of 
its task, although the external condition of affairs was little 
favourable to the progress of a work undertaken in the 
greatest seriousness and with much enthusiasm. 

The only German bishop present at the beginning of the 
Council, Michael Helding, Bishop of Sidon and auxiliary 
Bishop of Mayence, had, in obedience to a summons from 
the Emperor to the Colloquy at Ratisbon, been obliged 
to leave before Christmas, and was only able to attend the 
second session, leaving Trent immediately, on the following 
day, the 8th of January .^ Germany since then had only 

» Ehses, IV., 573 seq. ; Massarelli, Diarium I., II., ed. Merkle, I., 
398, 433 ; Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 8, n. 1-3. 

2 KnoPFLER in Wetzer und Welte, Kirchenlexicon, XI., 2nd ed. 
2053-2056, gives a clear account of the standing orders. 

^ Massarelli, Diarium, I., under Nov. 16, Dec, 23, and Jan, 8, £{'. 
Merkle, I., 327, 359, 369; Diarium, ibid., 432. 


been represented by the procurators of Cardinal Otto von 
Truchsess of Augsbui^. German bishops were not to 
be expected for a while owing to the disturbed state of 
the Empire and the Emperor's attitude.^ By the end of 
January and in the course of February various disquieting 
rumours were already current in Trent with regard to the 
intentions of the Protestants.^ On the 29th of January 
Massarelli recorded that^ he had heard from Cardinal 
Madruzzo that the Protestants had offered to recover 
Piedmont from France for the Emperor if the latter would 
renounce his alliance with the Pope and withdraw his 
support from the Council. On the 23rd of February 
Madruzzo again affirmed on reliable sources of information 
that a deputation of German Protestants was shortly to 
be expected at Trent to assert the illegality of the Council.* 
Luther's death, which took place on the i8th of February 
1546, did not alter the hostile attitude of his followers 
towards the General Synod ; Melanchthon, on the contrary, 
now issued at the bidding of the Elector of Saxony a work 
in oppvosition to the Council;^ and soon afterwards two 
long pamphlets were printed by the Protestants, contain- 
ing a rejection of the Council.^ 

From the side of the Imperial policy, the Council, after 
its opening on the 13th of December,^ contrary to the 

* On May 14 the Dominican, Ambrosius Pelargus at last made his 
appearance as procurator to the Elector of Treves (Massarelli, 
Diarium III., ed. Merkle, I., 547 seg.). 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 559 n. 

* Diarium I., ed. Merkle, I., 396. 

* Diarium III., idtd., 490. 

6 Knopfler in Welzer und Welte, Kirchenlex., XL, 2nd ed., 2059. 

^ C/. Pastor, Reunionsbeitrebungen, 326 seg'^. 

^ On Dec. 18, 1545, the nuncio Dandino wrote from Bois-leduc to 
Farnese that the Imperial court was still convinced that the Council 
would not be held (Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 501). After the actual 


hopes of the court, met at first only with restrictions, since 
the plans of Charles V. as then existent were not in favour 
of the undisturbed progress of the dogmatic labours of 
the Fathers. The Emperor, already resolved to meet the 
Protestants, if necessity demanded, on the field of battle, 
wished first of all to make one more attempt at reconcilia- 
tion by means of a religious conference to be held during 
the Diet appointed to meet at Ratisbon. To meet the 
justifiable offence caused by the resumption of such 
religious conferences after the Council had been opened, 
Charles, before his departure for Ratisbon, gave the nuncio 
Verallo a general assurance that affairs would be con- 
ducted there in such a manner as to give the Pope 
satisfaction. The religious colloquy was only a mask. 
The Emperor, however, expressed a wish that the Council 
might for a while suspend its labours in order to avoid 
irritation of the Protestants.^ The religious discussions at 
Ratisbon, opened on the 27th of January but actually begun 
on February the 5th, were just as ineffectual and resultless 
as all their predecessors,^ and ended in the departure of the 
Protestant disputants from the city on the 20th and 21st 
of March without having even waited for the Emperor's 

About this time the Cardinal of Trent in a confidential 

opening of the Synod was made known, Verallo and Dandino wrote 
again, on Jan. 7, 1546, to Farnese that the Emperor had expressed to 
them his gratification at the news. 

1 Verallo to the Legates from Utrecht, dat. Feb. 4, 1546 (Nuntiatur- 
berichte, VIIL, 547 seq.). Dandino and Marquina wrote likewise to 
Farnese {cf. Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, L, 513); also 
Dandino to Cervini, dat. Feb. 4, 1546 (Druffel, Karl IV., 528 ; cf. 
Merkle, I., 482). 

2 See infra, p. 2%o seq. ; ^ also Cardinal Otto Truchsess' letter from 
Augsburg to Farnese and, in similar terms, to the Legates at Trent, 
dat. March 14, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, VIIL, 573 seqq.). 

VOL. XII. 17 


conversation with Massarelli ^ spoke of the danger of a 
transference of the Council to Germany, while the adoption 
of an ItaHan city would never meet with the consent of 
the Emperor and the Germans. 

At last, on the 15th of March, the Imperial orator 
Francisco de Toledo also reached Trent. He was in- 
tended temporarily to replace Mendoza, who was ill, and 
afterwards, if it was necessary, to be joint representative 
with him of the Emperor at the Council. Francisco de 
Toledo paid his visit to the Legates on the i8th of March, 
and then, on Madruzzo's advice, went at once to Padua in 
order to confer personally with Mendoza and to come to a 
closer understanding. After his return he attended for the 
first time, on the 5th of April, a general congregation, and 
there presented his mandate ; in the next general congre- 
gation, on the 7th of April, he received the written reply 
of the Council.2 In the solemn session held on the follow- 
ing day all these documents were read aloud. From that 
time forward the intrusion of the Imperial policy into the 
procedure of the Council was carried on by the ambassadors 
with far greater want of consideration than had been shown 
hitherto by the Cardinal of Trent; for Charles V., in view 
of his attitude towards the Protestants, was seeking at any 
price to avoid the discussion of dogmatic questions. On 
the 25th of May, Mendoza also at last arrived in Trent.^ 

The Council in the meanwhile had applied itself to a 
subject which the Legates had brought forward in the 
general congregation of February the 8th : the establish- 

1 Massarelli, Diarium, III., under March 15, ed. Merkle, I., 513; 
also in the Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 653. 

' Cf. Massarelli, Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 436 seq.; Diarium, 
III., ibid., 512, 517, 530 ; Severoli, ibid.., 44, 48 ; Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 13. 

3 Cf. Massarelli, Diarium, II., ed. Merkle, I., 439 ; Diarium, ibid., 


ment of the Canon of Holy Scripture as the foundation 
and bulwark of the defence of Church doctrine. Here clear 
definition was all the more necessary as the Reformers 
appealed in the first instance to the Bible, certain portions, 
however, of which they rejected. The question therefore 
had to be examined, whether all the books of the Old and 
New Testaments in common use were to be regarded as 
parts of Holy Scripture; and also a point of no less im- 
portance, what respect was due together with the written 
word to that ecclesiastical tradition which the Protestants 
had entirely discarded. 

One only among the Fathers of the Council, Nachianti, 
Bishop of Chioggia, a man of Protestant tendencies, was 
of opinion that tradition should be disregarded, since in 
the gospels all was written down that was necessary to 
salvation and the Christian life. This view, however, was 
rejected and refuted by appeal to Holy Scripture and the 
ancient Fathers. On the establishment of the Canon 
of Holy Scripture animated debates from time to time 

After long discussion in the general congregations of the 
I2th, 15th, and 26th of February, the 5th, 17th, and 27th of 
March, the ist, 3rd, 5th, and 7th of April, and in the particu- 
lar congregations preceding them, which were accompanied 
by meetings of the theologians, the two decrees were at 
last agreed to which were published in the solemn session 
of the 8th of April 1546.^ The first dogmatic decree, 

* For the negotiations and events between the third and fourth 
sessions, cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 28-48 ; Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
ibid., 434-437; Diarium, III., ibid., 477-533; EhseS, V., 3-89; 
Pallavicini, I. 6, c. 11-16: Knopfler, in Wetzer und Welte, 
Kirchenlex., XL, 2nd ed., 2056 seq, ; EhSES, iu the Rom. Quartalschr., 
XL, 598 seq., in Histor. Jahrb., XXVI. , 300 seq., and in the Dritten 
Veremschrift der Gorres-Gesellschaft for 1908, 37 seq. For the fourth 


" Of the Canonical Scriptures " (de canonicis Scripturis), 
declares not only the Old and New Testaments, but also 
apostolic tradition, to be the sources of the Church's 
doctrine, and sets forth the Canon of the Bible. The 
discussions on the misuses which had become current with 
regard to editions and translations of the Holy Scriptures, 
as well as with regard to their interpretation and use, led to 
the second decree of the fourth session, " Of the editing and 
use of the Sacred Books " (de editione et usu sacrorum 
librorum). Here it was in the first place declared that the 
ancient Latin version, preserved for so many centuries by 
the usage of the Church under the name of the " Vulgata," 
was in public recitals, disputations, sermons, and exposi- 
tions to be held to be authentic, and no one was to dare, 
under any pretext whatever, to reject it. This, as had 
been set forth in the preceding discussions, did not assert 
that the language or form of the Vulgate was incapable of 
improvement, but only that in matters of faith and morals 
it contained no errors. In the same province of teaching 
it was enacted that all interpretations of Holy Scripture 
were forbidden which did not adhere to the sense held 
by the Holy Catholic Church, or disagreed with the clear 
consensus of the Fathers. Further, the decree prescribed 
the greatest care and accuracy in the future issue of 
editions of the Bible, and ordained that for the future no 
books on religious subjects should be published without 
ecclesiastical authority.^ 

sitting, of April 8, 1546, cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 48-50 ; Massarelli, 
Diarium, II., III., ibid., 437 seq., 534; Ehses, V., 90-104; Pal- 
LAVICINI, 1. 6, c. 16. 

* For the two decrees, cf. Kaulen, Gesch. der Vulgata, Mainz, 1868, 
379-419. No decision was come to with regard to the translation of 
the Bible into the vernacular (see Peters, Kirche und Bibellesen, 
Paderboin, 1908, 24). That no adverse measures were t?.ker>, as 


Besides these two decrees of the 8th of April, it had 
been intended to publish a third in the same session on a 
resolution of the general congregation held on the previous 
day. This was to contain an indictment " in contumaciam " 
against the bishops who still abstained from attending the 
Council. But before the proceedings began, the Legates 
were induced by the ambassadors of Charles V., supported 
by the two Imperialist Cardinals, to drop the publication 
for the present ; it was represented that Charles V. and 
other princes would take offence, whereupon the majority 
declared themselves in favour of postponement.^ At this 
session the Archbishop of Sassari sang the High Mass, and 
the Servite General, Agostino Bonuccio, preached, while the 
prelates in session were the five Cardinals, eight arch- 
bishops, forty-one bishops, four generals of orders, and 
three abbots.^ The time between the third and fourth 
sessions was occupied with the transactions of the Legates 
with the Pope over an important matter of ecclesiastical 

After Paul III. had given his consent to the resolution 
of the 22nd of January 1546 that the Council should treat 
questions of reform and dogma concurrently, the Bull 
" Superni dispositione,"^ probably drawn up in January 
1542 but not published, was again produced, with fresh 
suggestions for revision,'* and conveyed to the Legates 

Cardinal Pacheco wished, was due to Cardinal C. Madruzzo, the 
single German prelate who was then present at the Council. (See 
EhSES in the Dritten Vereinschrift der Gorres-Gesellschaft for 1908, 

* Cf. Severoli, loc. cit. ; Pallavicini, loc. cit. ; Ehses, V., 93. 

2 Ehses, v., 10 1 seq. 

3 The text of the Bull in Ehses, IV., 489-498. For the date of its 
appearance, ibid., 489 seq., n. 6, and its subsequent fortuneSj ibid., 
498 seq. 

* In Ehses, IV., 499 seq. 


for their opinion on the 17th of February 1546.^ By this 
document the jurisdiction of the bishops in their dioceses 
was to be extended as against the limits imposed by the 
Roman Curia, and some of the most crying abuses done 
away. In their answer of the 7th of March 2 the Legates 
pointed out the necessity that, in this matter, the Pope's 
ruling should not be one-sided, but be preceded by con- 
sultation in the Council. At the same time, in their letter 
to Cardinal Farnese^ they expressed themselves without 
reserve on the general expectation and demand for reforms, 
and showed that the programme contained in the Bull 
under consideration was quite inadequate. Paul III. was 
in no way displeased with their candour, and sent answers 
through his secretary Maffei and Cardinal Farnese on the 
13th and 23rd of March 1546, consenting to the submittal 
of the question of reform to the Council, while reserving to 
himself a certain amount of co-operation by reconstructing 
the Bull in conformity with their observations.* 

In a letter of acknowledgment dated the loth of April 
1546 the Legates again unfolded with much detail their 
reasons for insisting that the labours of reform should be 
a joint burden to be borne by the Council in combination 
with the Pope.^ 

They first laid stress on the necessity of reform of the 
Dataria, which must begin with deeds and not with the issue 

* Cf. Farnese's letter to the Legates of Feb. 17, 1546 (Druffel- 
Brandi, II., n. 343, p. 390 ; EhSES, IV., 499). 

2 Considerationes legatorum concilii super bulla, quam proposuerat 
edere Paulus III. super reformatione, in Ehses, IV., 500 seq. 

3 In Ehses, IV., 501 seq. ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 6, c. 13, n. 6 ; 
Knopfler in Wetzer und Welte, Kirchenlex., XI., 2nd ed. 2058. 

* See DRUFFEL-Brandi, n. 368, 386; Ehses, Kirchliche Reform- 
arbeiten, 404. 

6 Druffel-Brandi, 469. A full account of the contents in 
Pallavicini, 1. 7, c 2. 


of Bulls. But besides the reform of this tribunal, that of the 
Consistory was also absolutely imperative. The primary 
consideration must be to bestow bishoprics with proper 
caution and sense of responsibility, and in places where 
the appointment lay in the hands of princes to accept such 
persons only as possessed the proper qualifications in age, 
worthiness, and learning, and were able and willing to reside 
in their sees. The appointment to a plurality of bishoprics 
must, even in the case of Cardinals, be entirely abolished. 

The reform of the episcopate, the Legates continued, 
consists mainly in the enforcement of the duty of residence ; 
with regard to the regular clergy, the presence of Generals 
of Orders at the Council permits of the necessary settle- 
ment being reached ; as to the secular power, the canonical 
penalties against the transgressors of ecclesiastical juris- 
diction must be renewed, and with an increase of severity. 
As far as the rights of the Apostolic See are concerned, all 
depends upon the just dealing of the Pope. The grievances 
of the bishops are specially directed against pensions, 
tenths, the ordination of unworthy priests, the exemptions 
granted to protonotaries and other privileged persons, 
against the absolutions of the Penitentiaria, and above all 
against the bestowal of benefices carrying with them a cure 
of souls on unfit recipients, who are non-resident and 
pluralists. The Dataria must be inflexible in filling up 
vacancies only with men of competent learning and 
approved piety, who have the inclination and the sense of 
duty to discharge their functions in person. For the 
training of a good body of clergy the Legates advised the 
encouragement of seminaries, and with justifiable severity 
they finally denounced the monstrous abuses of the so- 
called reversions. 

In a letter to Farnese of the 15th of ApriP the Legate' 
' Druffel-Brandi, 474 ; cj. Pallavicini, 1. 7, c. 2, n. 7, 8, 


with a thorough recapitulation of the state of things, asked 
what matters were now first to be taken in hand. Farnese's 
answer of the 24th of April ^ expressed the Pope's full 
approval of the Legatine programme of reform, but insisted 
that their labours in this direction should not retard the 
progress of their dogmatic decisions, and that the Council 
should not pass resolutions without the Pope's consent, 
just as he wished to carry out the measures of reform 
immediately and directly affecting himself, only in agree- 
ment with the Synod. 

The approbation of the decrees published at the fourth 
session of the Council by Paul III. gave rise to difficulties 
which were only removed after long negotiation.^ Not 
only the commission of theologians appointed by the Pope 
to consider the decrees, but also the College of Cardinals, 
expressed unfavourable criticism of the proposition that 
the Vulgate, without previous revision or improvement, 
simply as it stood, was to be declared authentic. It was 
only after repeated and elaborate justification of the 
decrees on the part of the Legates that the approbation 
of the Pope was obtained. 

After the fourth session the Council ^ in the general 
congregation of the 15th of April was occupied with the 
still unsettled questions of reform which were now to form 
the subject of discussion in the fifth. The Easter season 
offered a moment of respite. Then in the general congre- 

* Druffel-Brandi, 482 ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 7, c. 2, n. 10. 

* Cf. Kaulen, Gesch. der Vulgata, 421-426; Pallavicini, 1. 6, 
c. 17; 1. 7, c. 12; Knopfler, loc. cit., 2059. The correspondence 
between the Legates and Rome belonging to this period in Ver- 
CELLONE, Dissert. Acad., Roma, 1864. 

3 For the time between the fourth and fifth sessions, cf. Severoli, ed. 
Merkle, I., 50-80; MassareUi, Diarium, II.,zW^., 43S-441 ; Diarium, 
III., ibid., 534-554 ; Ehses, V., 105 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 7, c. 3-12 ; 
Knopfler, loc. cit., 2059-2061. 


gations of the lOth, i8tb, 20th, and 21st of May the work 
proceeded.- There was a discussion on the erection of 
chairs of exegesis of Holy Scripture and the art of 
preaching. In dealing with the highly necessary reform 
of the pulpit, particular attention was directed to the 
limitation of the privileges of the monks. The debates 
on this point were occasionally very heated ; as usual, 
Bishop Martelli of Fiesole gave way to uncurbed violence 
of language. He was met by the Dominican, Caselli, 
Bishop of Bertinoro, who in other ways also was at great 
pains to refute all the grounds of objection brought against 
the religious orders. A great impression was made by a 
speech from the General of the Augustinian Hermits, 
Seripando, who in very calm and effective words balanced 
the reasons for the exercise of the preacher's office by the 
bishops or the regular clergy. Seripando showed clearly 
that under existing circumstances the bishops and parish 
priests could not meet the exigencies of preaching in a 
diocese. After thus proving the necessity of calling in the 
regulars as auxiliaries, he went on to show how unreason- 
able it was that even in their own churches they should 
be entirely dependent on the bishops.^ The bishops' duty 
of residence was also treated in the general congregation 
of the loth of May, and again on the 9th and loth of 
June. The decision on this difficult question was, how- 
ever, postponed to a later date. 

The Imperial ambassador, Toledo, supported by Cardinal 
Madruzzo and the other prelates of the Emperor's party, 
did all he could to prevent dogmatic questions also being 
prepared for the next session.^ To this wish of the 
Emperor the Legates opposed the, for them, more authori- 

* EhSES, v., 132 seq. 

2 The reform decree was passed on June 15 and 16, 

' Pallavicini, 1. 7, c. 3. 


tative wish of the Pope. They wrote in any case to Rome 
for powers to enable them to suspend the Council rather 
than to be forced to yield to the Emperor's attacks on 
its freedom. After they had once more received, through 
a letter of Farnese of May the 13th, the intimation that 
they were to pay no regard to the Emperor's objections, 
they laid before the general congregation of May the 24th 
the article on original sin as the subject of discussion for 
the dogmatic decree of the forthcoming session. This 
important topic occupied the general congregation on the 
28th and 31st of May, the 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th, and 14th of 
June; on the i6th of June the decree was drawn up.^ 
It contained a thorough and lucid definition, in opposition 
to the vacillating doctrines of the Protestants, of the nature 
of original sin, of its propagation, of its consequences, and 
its remission in baptism. 

The Immaculate Conception of Mary was also the 
subject of deliberations of the most profound and weighty 
character. Cardinal Pacheco had already proposed the de- 
finition on the 28th of May.^ The newly arrived theologians 
of the Pope, Laynez and Salmeron of the Society of Jesus, 
maintained the ^ame view with ardour, and were supported 
by no inconsiderable number of the Fathers. The opposi- 
tion came chiefly from the Dominicans. They were so 
strong that Pacheco on the 8th and 14th of June moved that 
the decree should only contain the words, "The Immaculate 
Conception of the Mother of God is a pious opinion." ^ But 
even on this point Pacheco was not successful ; the majority 
were against any immediate decision on the question. 

* See EhSES, V., 163 seq.^ 166 seq.., 172 seq.^ 182 seq., 193 seq., 199 
seq., 212 seq.^ 218 seq., 233 seq. ; cf. Histor. Jahrb., XXVII., 70 seq. 

2 Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 64 seq. ; PallaviCINI, I. 7, c. 3, n. 8 ; 
c. 7 ; Druffel-Brandi, p. 539. 

3 Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 70, 76. 


The Synod at the end of the decree only declared that it 
was not their intention to include in this decree on Original 
Sin the blessed and immaculate Virgin Mary and Mother 
of God (non esse suae intentionis comprehendere in hoc 
decreto, ubi de peccato originali agitur, beatam et immacu- 
latam Virginem Mariam, Dei Genitricem). The terms 
of the ordinances of Sixtus IV. on this question were 
adhered to.^ 

The decree on Original Sin was published on the 17th 
of June 1546 in the fifth public session.^ This was 
attended by the three Cardinal Legates and Cardinal 
Pacheco,^ nine archbishops, forty-eight bishops, two mitred 
Benedictine abbots, three generals of orders, many theo- 
logians, and the Imperial ambassadors. The solemn High 
Mass was sung by Bishop Alessandro Piccolomini of 
Piacenza, while the Dominican, Marco Laureo, preached. 
The final passing of the dogmatic decree raised once more 
objections from Cardinal Pacheco and a certain number of 
other bishops on account of the omission of an express 
clause on the Immaculate Conception of Mary. 

After this dogmatic decree came another for publica- 
tion of a sound reforming character. It dealt with the 
Holy Scriptures, instituted expert instruction in the same, 
and regulated preaching. Among particular enactments 
was one ordering that in cathedral churches, where 
foundations already existed for lectures on theology and 

* Cf. our remarks, Vol. IV. of this work, 394 seq. 

2 Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 88-82; Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., 
ibid., 441, 554 ; Ehses, V., 238 seqq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 7, c. 13. 

^ Madruzzo was absent. He had gone on May 12, at the Emperor's 
request, to the Diet at Ratisbon (Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. 
Merkle, I., 547), and had indeed returned thence to Trent on 
June 14, but, after a visit to the Legates, had at once continued his 
journey to Rome, where he had to present to the Pope proposals -frofti 
the Emperor {ibid..^ 554 ; cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., viii-xi, 46 seqq.). 


Holy Scripture, the bishops must provide that those who 
drew the salaries also carried out the obligations. In other 
churches where no such foundations existed, vacant livings 
should be given to learned men, or a common contribution 
be levied to endow suitable lectureships on the Holy 
Scriptures. Nor should similar instruction be lacking in 
convents, and princes ought to be exhorted to supply such 
lectureships to universities where they were still lacking. 
But in order that, under the show of godliness, godlessness 
might not be sown, no one should be permitted to exercise 
such functions privately or publicly who had not been 
examined first by the Bishop as to his manner of life, his 
opinions, and his knowledge, and been found approved. 

With regard to preaching, it was ordered that bishops, 
archbishops, primates, and all other prelates of the Church 
should be bound in duty themselves to preach the gospel, 
and in case of hindrance to find suitable persons to take 
their place ; that parish priests should at least on all Sundays 
and feast days, either in person or through fitting substitutes, 
teach those things the knowledge of which is necessary to 
salvation, whereby in short and intelligible words they 
may point out the faults which men ought to shun, and 
the virtues after which they should strive. The regular 
clergy, even in the churches of their order, are forbidden 
to preach before they have received from their superior a 
certificate of character and learning and a permission from 
the bishop ; preachers who disseminate errors or cause 
scandal must be forbidden the pulpit by their bishops, and 
if they have been teachers of heresy be dealt with according 
to the customs of the locality; the bishop, however, should 
be careful that no preacher is molested on false charges or 
otherwise given cause for just complaint. Regulars who 
are not enclosed and secular priests who have not under- 
gone sufficient examination must not under any pretext 


receive episcopal permission to preach until they have 
made application to the Holy See. The collectors of alms 
or questuaries shall never preach themselves or get others 
to preach for them. 

At the request of the Archbishop of Sassari, the brief of 
June the 7th to the Legates, in which the Pope confirmed 
the decrees of reform, was then read aloud. Finally, the 
Promotor of the Council, Severoli, raised the charge "in 
contumaciam " against the still absent prelates. The 
proposed opening of the case against them was, however, 
deferred, since in the voting opinions were much divided as 
to which bishops should incur liability. Pacheco claimed 
immunity for the Germans ; others wished to restrict the 
proceedings solely to those who were in Italy, or only in 
Rome, without making their appearance in Trent. 

On the very day before the session a courier reached 
Trent from Ratisbon who brought to the Legates the 
Emperor's pressing entreaties that they should omit 
dogmatic decisions in the forthcoming session, out of 
consideration for his policy towards the Protestants. It 
was obviously no longer possible to give effect to this 

The sixth session had been fixed for the 29th of July. 
In the general congregation on the 2ist of June the 
Legates decided that the agenda for the session should 
comprise the dogmatic decree on justification and the 
measures of reform relating to episcopal residence and its 

* Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 76 seq.^ n. ; ibid.., Verallo's letter to 
Farnese of June 13 from Ratisbon. 

2 For the time between the fifth and sixth sessions, see Severoli, ed. 
Merkle, I., 82-121 ; Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., ibid., 441-458, 
554-601 ; Pallavicini, 1. 8 ; Knopfler, in Wetzer und Welte, 
Kirchenlex., XI., 2nd ed., 2063-2065. 


The Pope and the commission appointed for the Council 
were here entirely at one. The Legates were all the more 
in earnest as they held that on the article on justification 
all other dogmas depended, just as all other reform legisla- 
tion depended more or less on the enforcement of episcopal 
residence. In order to give support to the discussion of 
these two important points the Pope deputed a band of 
distinguished theologians.^ The envoy of the republic 
of Lucca affirmed with satisfaction that the fifth session 
had been held with the participation of nearly seventy 
voting members, so that opponents could now no longer 
point the finger of criticism at the slender number of those 
who attended the Synod.^ Spirits rose still higher when 
on the 26th of June the ambassadors of France at last 
made their entry into Trent. They were Claude d'Urfe, 
Jacques de Lignieres, and Pierre Danes. Their letters as 
plenipotentiaries were to be presented at the general 
congregation on the 30th. It seemed as if on this occasion 
the conflicting claims of the French and the representative 
of Ferdinand I. might lead to an unseemly quarrel over 
precedence. The wisdom of the Legates, however, found 
a way of escape which satisfied both parties. In conse- 
quence the Imperial ambassador, Mendoza, attended in 
person the solemn reception of the French envoys. In his 
oration Danes called to mind, yet in moderate terms, the 
services rendered by the French Kings to the Church, in 
order afterwards to lay special emphasis on the fact that 
Francis I. had always kept his kingdom pure from any 
stain of error. The most important passage in his speech 
was the exhortation to the Fathers to restore unity to 
Christendom on the firm basis of dogma, and thence to 
proceed to a thorough reform of ecclesiastical evils. In 

' See Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. i. 

2 Cf. Ehses, in the Rom. Quartalschrift, XIX., 180. 


the execution of this programme King Francis would 
array all his power on their side.^ 

The appearance of the French ambassadors and their 
declarations encouraged the hope that the Synod would 
soon oe more amply constituted by the arrival of the French 
bishops. Meanwhile the Fathers threw all their energy 
into the settlement of the doctrine of justification, which, as 
yet, had hardly ever come within the scope of Conciliar 
treatment. They hoped in deep earnest that this subject, 
which struck at the capital doctrines of the Protestants, 
would be mastered in time for the sixth session, appointed 
to meet on the 29th of July.^ 

While thus everything warranted the prosperous con- 
tinuation of the labours of the Council, suddenly unfore- 
seen difficulties arose which threatened even to cut short 
its days. The long-impending war between Charles V. 
and the Protestant Estates had broken out, and the 
Emperor and the Council were links in a closely forged 

^ Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 3 ; Mavnier, 364 j^*?. 
' Ehses, loc. cit.y 181. 


The Papal-Imperial League of June 1546. 
The Schmalkaldic War. 

With ever growing success the political and military 
organisation of the Protestant Estates known as the 
Schmalkaldic League continued their efforts to weaken 
the Imperial authority in accordance with the principle, 
"Cujus regio ejus religio," to set up within their own 
boundaries the supremacy of religious absolutism, and to 
establish an order of things which should leave no room 
for the ecclesiastical princes, especially those who still 
clung to the belief and discipline of the Catholic Church. 

The Emperor had laboured in vain to bring the ecclesias- 
tical troubles to an end by means of a peaceable settlement 
and to appease the Confederates of Schmalkald by far- 
reaching concessions. Every new success only emboldened 
the latter to make fresh encroachments. Now, as before, 
they were suitors for foreign help ; now, as before, their 
proceedings within the limits of the Empire bore every- 
where the stamp of the negation of that Empire's laws. 

If the existing system of the law was not to founder 
utterly, the aggressions of the Protestant Estates would 
have to be met by force of arms. Even the Emperor 
convinced himself of this at last. According to his own 
memoirs, the thought of encountering the Protestant 
Estates of the Empire on the field first came to Charles V. 
nfter his successful overthrow of the Duke of Cleves tn the 



summer of 1543.^ At first the time was not fully ripe; 
some fresh provocations must yet be given. The strongest 
was undoubtedly the stubborn refusal of the Protestant 
Estates to attend the Council summoned by the Pope, 
because it was neither general nor free, nor even Christian. 

In the meantime the peace with France had entirely 
altered the political situation, and created the possibility 
of giving a decisive turn to affairs in Germany by an 
appeal to the sword. The protestantizing Estates were 
not blind to the danger which they thus incurred. Never- 
theless, with the temerity of previous successes, they 
demanded of the Emperor impracticable terms: either 
security against the decrees of the Council by a recognition 
under the laws of the Empire of a territorial ecclesiastical 
system, or a council without the Pope, which was identical 
with the subversion of the whole ecclesiastical constitution 
then existing.^ 

At the time of the Diet of Worms, when the Protestant 
policy of entire disavowal of the "papistical council" at 
Trent was made manifest,^ the plan of Charles V. to apply 
force had already assumed so definite a shape that he 
proposed to Cardinal Farnese in May 1545, an offensive 
alliance with the Pope against the Protestant Estates. 
The Cardinal hastened joyfully to Rome, where the Pope 
at once entered into the scheme and ordered preparations 
for war to be begun at once. But it soon became evident 
that the Emperor, fully apprised of the greatness and 
difficulty of the undertaking, had made up his mind 10 
defer hostilities until the following year.* 

The Pope consented, and, in conformity with the 

^ Cf. supra, p. 206. 

2 Cf. Ranke, Deutsche Gesch., IV., 6th ed., 256, 258 seq. 
' J ANSSEN- Pastor, III., i8th ed., 587 seq, 
* Supra, pp. 223, 227 seqq. 


Emperor's wishes, took advantage of Andelot's presence to 
have a draft drawn up of the articles of the Papal-Imperial 
League for the overthrow of the protesting Estates.^ To 
the terms of this proposal, however, the Imperialists had 
many objections. They disliked, to begin with, the wording 
of the preamble that the use of force appeared necessary to 
Charles V., since in consequence of the determined refusal 
of the Protestants no more hopes could be entertained of 
the removal of the religious troubles by the Council. They 
also took exception to the clause stating that the Emperor 
ought not, without the express sanction of Paul III., to 
enter into any negotiations with the Protestants. They 
also demurred to the subsidy being restricted to 200,000 
ducats, and the payment of the auxiliaries to a period not 
longer than four months.^ As the nuncios Dandino and 
Verallo did not feel authorized in introducing alterations 
of such importance into the document, Marquina, who had 
come to Rome in October 1545 on the matter of the 
Council, undertook to negotiate with the Pope concerning 
the objections to the draft treaty and other wishes of the 
Emperor as well, bearing on the taxes to be levied on the 
Spanish ecclesiastical funds.^ 

The political situation was further improved for the 
Emperor by the armistice concluded with the Turks in 
November 1545 by Ferdinand I.* Not less favourable 
was the continuance of war between France and England, 
which deprived the Schmalkaldians of any hope of 
support from either of those powers. But in the Empire 

* The text of the draft in Deutschen Zeitschrlft fiir Geschichtswissen- 
S(haft, III. (1890), \\(i seq. 

^ See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 50 seq., 321 seq.^ 326 seq. Cf. 
DrUFFFX, Beitrage, I., 3. 

3 See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII,, 51 seq. 

♦ See ZiNKEiSEN, II., 860 seq. 


itself affairs were undergoing a development which almost 
forced the Emperor to take decisive steps against the 
Protestant Estates.^ 

The latter were always usurping new positions. In 
August 1545, Duke Augustus of Saxony appointed a 
Protestant " bishop " in Merseburg ; in October, Sebastian 
von Heusenstamm was chosen, through the intrigues of 
Philip of Hesse and contrary to the wishes of the Emperor 
and the Pope, to succeed Albert of Brandenburg in 
Mayence, where the Protestant party promised themselves 
that he would follow the example set by the Arch- 
bishop of Cologne, Hermann von Wied. The latter, when 
Paul HI. took action against him, had appealed, on the 
nth of July 1545, to a free Christian council to be held 
in Germany or to a Diet, and gave in his adhesion to the 
Schmalkaldic League.^ 

The affairs of Cologne caused anxiety to the Emperor, 
not merely because by the introduction of Protestantism 
on the Rhine his possessions in the Netherlands were 
seriously threatened, but because of other reasons beyond 
that. As the secession of the Elector Palatine Frederick 
to the new religion was to be expected, the Protestants, in 
the event of Hermann von Wied holding his own, would 
have a majority in the Electoral College. If the Catholic 
Church in Germany collapsed, the fall of the Roman- 
German Empire would follow.^ 

Charles V. was fully conscious of the gravity of the 

1 This is Egelhaaf'S opinion (II., 444). "Unless the Emperor," 
says HUBER (IV., 120), "wished to renounce all his plans for good and 
all and to forfeit all authority in Germany, only one course lay open 
to him — war." 

2 Cf. GULIK, Gropper, 114 seq.\ Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 
611 seq. ; Hasenclever, Politik der Schmalkaldner, 27 seq.^ 151 seq. ; 
Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 60. 

3 Cf. Egelhaaf, II., 446 seq. ; Janssen-Pastor, III., i8thed.,6i3. 


situation. In his memoirs he summed up his feelings at 
the time in the words : " Come what will, I am determined, 
dead or alive, to remain Emperor in Germany."^ 

Although Charles did not conceal from himself the 
greatness and difficulties of his enterprise, he did nothing 
precipitately. To the Pope he showed himself determined 
to have the form of the treaty altered. The negotiations 
over this were protracted, but when Marquina left Rome at 
last on the 13th of December 1545 he had gained weighty 
advantages for his master. On December the 27th he 
presented to the Emperor at Bois-le-Duc the answer of 
Paul I II. J containing important concessions. The pre- 
amble of the treaty was entirely altered ; it now ran that 
the Emperor and Pope allied themselves in support of the 
Council. A larger subsidy than 200,000 ducats Paul III. 
refused, but, on the other hand, he consented to extend the 
payment of the auxiliaries over another two months, making 
a total of six months. Further, he declared his readiness to 
help the Emperor should he be attacked unjustly by any 
other prince — France was meant, — not only during the 
war against the Protestant Estates, but also for six months 
after its termination. The article which made it impossible 
for Charles V. to enter into pacific negotiations with the 
Protestants before the outbreak of war seems to have 
been allowed to drop out of sight at Rome. On the other 
hand, Paul III. insisted that while war continued, the 
Emperor, without the express consent of the Holy See, 
should be debarred from making any agreement with the 
Protestants, so far as the object of the war was concerned, 
and in particular any compromise on matters of religion.^ 

* Commentaires, 229. Cf. Mocenigo in the Fontes. rer. Austr., 
XXX., 81 seq. 

2 Cf. Druffel, Beitrage, I., 3; Karl V., IV., I seq.; Druffel- 
Brandi, 239 ; Nuntiaturberichte, VII I,, 53 seq.^ ^\7. seq 


If not all, yet the essential wishes of the Emperor were 
thus satisfied. It was therefore to be expected that the 
signature of the treaty thus amended would now take 
place, but instead of this, the decisive moment was again 
put off. At the Imperial court various tendencies were 
at work. The Emperor's confessor, Pedro Soto, was for 
war, and composed a report, exposing with great acumen 
the weak side of the Schmalkaldic League, in order to 
remove the Emperor's fears. To the confessor Granvelle 
stood opposed, and Charles, who on the whole liked to put 
things off, deferred his decision and declared he would not 
settle the treaty before he got to Ratisbon. He hoped 
not merely to obtain still further alterations in the agree- 
ment, but also was afraid lest in the event of a final deter- 
mination the Protestants should get to know beforehand 
of the blow that was being aimed at them, and thus be 
able to take counter-measures the more easily.^ 

Besides deceiving the enemy, it was of the first import- 
ance for the success of the undertaking that alliances 
should be won and the right time chosen for delivering the 
first blow. With admirable circumspection the Emperor 
bent his mind on creating a political situation favourable 
to the approaching war. If even in this respect he 
achieved successes which were of no mean value, yet from 
time to time he was visited by grave doubts as to the 
possibility of carrying through an enterprise on the success 
of which his all was staked. The indecision with which in 
February and March 1546 he still continued to expresi 
himself with regard to his military plans justifies the con- 
clusion that if a means had offered itself of attaining his 

* Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 54 seq.^ 518 seq., 545; the letters of 
Charles V. of Feb. 16, 1546, in Maurenbrecher, 36* seq. ; for which 
compare Druffel, Karl V., IV., 458 ; Soto's memorial in MaUREN 
BRECHER, 29* seq. 


end v/ithout having recourse to war, in no case would he 
have thrust that instrument aside.^ 

In the first place, Charles V. on the 27th of January 1546, 
allowed the religious conference, already promised in the 
Recess of Worms for the 30th of November 1545, to 
begin at Ratisbon. It must be assumed that he wished 
thereby to gain time and also to make an impression on 
the Pope,^ since he can hardly have reckoned on any sort 
of success. The prospects of a friendly agreement were 
more unfavourable than ever. It was not merely that 
since the last attempt of this kind, made five years before, 
the feeling on both sides had altered essentially, and that 
all hope had departed of ever attaining anything by means 
of such conferences, but the position of the Catholics was 
one of the utmost difficulty since the sessions of the Council 
of Trent had begun. From nearly all the Catholic princes 
the Emperor had received refusals. The staunch Catholics 
were more than ever disinclined for conferences on religion, 
since the total failure in 1541 of the colloquy at Ratisbon 
arranged by the representatives of the middle party in 
conjunction with the Emperor. In these strict circles the 
opinion had been reached, not incorrectly, that in such con- 
ferences the Protestants had always come off as the winning 
side. Even from the side of the disputants themselves 
difficulties were in store for the Emperor. Julius Pflug, in 
whom Charles placed special confidence, and to whom, for 
that reason, he had offered the place of President, declined 
on grounds of weak health. Even the Bishop of Eichstatt, 
Moritz von Hutten, who thereupon consented to fill the 
post, declared that he was only there in order to attend to 
the external order of the conference, but not to express 
his opinions on matters of faith. The Catholic theologians, 

^ See Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 57 seq.^ 65 seq. 

« CJ. Druffel, Beitriige, III., 508 ; Hasenclever, 217, 218. 


the Spanish Dominican Malvenda, Eberhard Billick, the 
Provincial of the Augustinians, Johann Hoffmeister, and 
Cochlaus, who obeyed the Emperor's summons, addressed 
letters to friendly curialists begging them to prevent the 
Pope from attaching an unfavourable meaning to their 

The Protestants, on their side, were much divided as to 
the attitude that should be taken towards the conference. 
To the strict Lutherans organizations of this sort seemed 
to be equally preposterous and superfluous. From their 
point of view the old believers had nothing else to do but 
simply to accept the new " Evangelium " proclaimed by 
Luther. This was approximately the opinion of the Saxon 
Elector and his theologians. The Landgrave of Hesse, 
having a diplomatic turn of mind, thought otherwise. 
Constantly under the influence of the slippery Bucer, he 
was again once more in favour of a certain amount of 

The opening of the Council of Trent threw the Protestant- 
izers into no small perplexity. They had to choose now 
between participation in the Council or in the new con- 
ference on religion ; they decided for the latter as being in 
their opinion the lesser evil of the two. Consequently, on 
the 17th of September the Elector of Saxony came to an 
agreement with the Landgrave that Melanchthon, Bucer, 
Schnepf, and Brenz should be spokesmen ; the Elector 
nevertheless was indisposed towards the conference. He 
and his theologians were fully determined to prevent any 

> C/C Pastor, Reunionsbestrebungen, 305 j^^.; Druffel, Karl V., 
IV., 465 seq. ; Paulus, Hoffmeister, 198 seq. ; SPAHN, Cochlaus, 306 ; 
POSTINA, Billick, 82 seq. V. Amerbach is an exception ; in his work, 
Praecipuae Constit. Caroli Magni (Ingolst., 1545), he expresses a hope 
that Charles V. would be successful in terminating the religious schism 
in Germany. 


agreement being reached at Ratisbon. At a later date 
Melanchthon's place was taken by Major.^ 

The conference opened on the 27th of January 1 546, and 
there at once arose an unpleasant wrangle over matters 
of form. The actual proceedings began on the 5th of 
February with a speech from Malvenda which raised a 
protest from the opposite side. By order of the Emperor 
the fourth article of the Confession of Augsburg, on 
justification, was to be discussed first at the conference. 
Malvenda unfolded the Catholic view; Bucer replied to 
him from the 6th to the nth of February. From the 
I2th to the 17th Billick spoke; he was opposed on the 
two following days by the Protestant theologians. From 
the 19th to the 22nd the debates were carried on "with- 
out notes or memoranda." 

The speeches of the Catholic delegates, with whom on 
this occasion no representative of the middle party was 
present, breathed a very different spirit from those of five 
years ago. The semi-Lutheran doctrine of justification, 
then supported by Cropper, was now energetically re- 
jected ; the spirit of the Catholic revival was distinctly per- 
ceptible. The Protestant theologians had great difficulty 
in establishing Luther's doctrine of justification and in 
adducing as proofs on their side such Bible texts as the 
Catholic theologians had used on theirs. Not even an 
approximation, far less an accord, was reached between 
them. It was clearly recognized that this was not, as had 
been asserted at the conference in 1541, a mere logomachy, 
the misunderstandings of which might be cleared away 
with ease, but a controversy invoK ing two conceptions of 
the most important doctrine of Christianity, which at the 

* Cf. DOLLINGER, Reformation, III., 323 seq.\ Pastor, Reunions- 
bestrebungen, 307 seq.; Druffel, Karl V., IV., 468 seq.; Postina, 
Billick, 83 seq.\ Hasenclever, Politik der Schmalkaldner, 219-22S. 


innermost core were diverse and irreconcilable. It was 
not, however, this consciousness of the fact which was 
decisive for the further course of the debate, but the 
publication on the 26th of February of an Imperial edict 
binding the disputants on oath to observe secrecy as to 
their transactions, in order to put a stop to unjustified 
attempts at interference from without. This reasonable 
and well-meant ordinance was welcomed by the Protestant 
party as an opportunity for recalling their representatives 
and thus bringing the conference to an end. On the 20th 
of March the Saxons departed after handing in a protes- 
tation. In spite of the most imploring entreaties on the 
part of the Presidents, the remainder of the party followed, 
appealing to the commands of their rulers. Even the 
gentle Pflug wrote at the time to Gropper that the repulsive 
and odious behaviour of the Protestants had nullified the 
conference, although the Emperor called it together at the 
urgent request of the opponents themselves.^ 

At the same time the Protestants had published two 
long memoirs in which they rejected the Tridentine Council 
and therefore demanded a free council, open to all 
Christians in common and without party, in a German 
city, to which the Emperor should summon not only the 
clergy but also the laity.^ These decjarations were 
peculiarly fitted to dispel any illusions as to the absolutely 
negative attitude of the Protestants towards the Council of 
Trent. The Landgrave Philip expressed himself in the 

^ Cf. DOLLINGER, Reformation, IIL, 325 seq. ; Lammer, Vortrid. 
Theol., 198 ; Pastor, loc. cit.^ 314-344 ; Heyd, IIL, 323 seq.; Baum, 
Capito und Butzer, 607 seq.; Druffel, Karl V., IV., 472 ; Paulus, 
Hoffmeister, 207 seq.; Spahn, Cochlaus, 307 seq.; Postina, Billick, 
86-90; Archiv fiir Ref.-Gesch., V., i seq., 375 seq., and Cammerer'S 
(Berlin, 1901) Dissertation. 

2 See Walch, XVII. , 11 12 seqq., 11 52 seqq.; Menzel, II., 443 scj. 


same sense in an interview which he had at Spires at the 
end of March with the Emperor. When Philip also met 
the Emperor's request that he should attend the forth- 
coming Diet with a qualified promise,^ this certainly was 
not likely to allay the Emperor's displeasure at the 
Landgrave's behaviour.- 

Charles thereupon made haste to reach Ratisbon, arriv- 
ing there on the loth of April 1546. His experience 
at the Diet there, as well as the outcome of the religious 
conference, could not but confirm him in his opinion that 
all pacific negotiations were in vain, and that nothing now 
remained but the appeal to arms.^ 

In Rome the Emperor's conduct had been watched 
with strained attention. He was as much as ever an 
object of distrust and suspected of playing a double game. 
The feeling in curial circles is described in a letter from 
Bishop Giovio to Duke Cosimo of Florence of the i8th 
of February 1546. " Never," he says, "will the Emperor's 
sword be drawn in reality against the Lutherans ; such 
an undertaking would be too perilous and unbefitting his 
sagacity. Charles will so comport himself at Ratisbon 
as to win over the Protestants and secure their friend:>hip 
in order to make use of them in his schemes against 
France." * 

The Imperial ambassador Vega believed for his part 
that the Pope at heart was opposed to the wars against 
the Protestants. Paul III., he advised, should be taken 

» See Hasenclever, Die Politik Karl V., und des Landgrafen 
Philipp von Hessen vor Ausbruch des Schmalkald. Krieges, Marburg, 

1903' 39 s^Q- 

* Cf. Commentaires, 117. 

8 Cf. Ranke, Deutsche Gesch., IV., 6th ed., 287, 296 seq. ; Janssen- 
Pastor, III., i8th ed., 617 seq. ; Venet. Depeschen, I., 480. 

4 Druffel, Karl v., IV., 533. 


on his weakest side and gained by hopes of the aggrandize- 
ment of the Farnesi.^ 

Marquina reached Rome again on the 23rd of February 
1546. His instructions were that the Emperor agreed to 
the conditions imposed by the Pope, but was not yet ready 
to ratify the treaty.^ This fresh delay must, together with 
renewed attempts at friendly negotiations with the Pro- 
testants, have disquieted the Pope intensely.^ Paul III.'s 
irritation at Charles was heightened still more by the 
want of consideration for his wishes and interests shown 
by the Imperialists in other matters. Quite apart from 
the interminable disputes over Spanish prize claims and 
Neapolitan tenths, there was a catalogue of grievances 
of other sorts : there was the Pragmatic question, the 
Emperor's demand that the Colonna should be reinstated, 
his attitude towards the matrimonial projects which were 
being forged for Vittoria Farnese, Pier Luigi's daughter ; 
lastly, the question of the suzerainty over Parma and 
Piacenza> A statement made by Granvelle in April to 
Buoncambi, Pier Luigi's agent, left no doubt that Charles 
held steadfastly to his Imperial rights over both these 

For a long time the relations between Pope and Emperor 
were materially influenced by the violent disputes into 
which Paul III. was drawn with his old opponent Cosimo 
de' Medici. 

The hostility of Cosimo to the Pope of the house of 
Farnese, whose intercourse with the Florentine exiles 

• See Vega's report of March 12, 1546, in Maurenbrecher, 
69* ; cf. Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 571, n. 2. 

2 Cf. Vega's report of March 30, in MaurenbrecheR, 69* 70*. 

3 Cf. Druffel, IV., 483 ; Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 471, n. 3. 

* Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, VIII., 43, 56, 488 n., 489 n., 510, 524, 572, 590. 
' See Aff6, 109 seq. 


seemed suspicious, was constantly fanned into flame by 
Cardinal Accolti, who was resident in Florence, and against 
whom Paul III. had sworn vengeance. This dangerous 
man busied himself with the most perverse schemes. In 
the summer of 1542, when the relations between Pope 
and Emperor were of extreme delicacy, he laid before 
Charles V. a detailed plan whereby Paul III. might be 
struck to the heart. The Emperor was to make himself 
master of Rome, put an end to the temporal power of the 
Pope, and once more assert the rights of the Empire.^ 
In order to give Accolti an assured position, Cosimo in 
the autumn of 1543 had succeeded in obtaining his 
appointment as ambassador from Charles to Florence.^ 
When the Pope thereupon uttered threats, Cosimo let 
Accolti know that he need have no fear, as he could easily 
obtain help from the Duke of Urbino, Ascanio Colonna, 
the Abbot of Farfa, and the Perugians. He refused un- 
conditionally to give up Accolti, while in the dispute on 
tenths in the spring of 1545 he agreed to a compromise.^ 
But immediately afterwards the question of the reform of 
the very decadent convents of Florence gave rise to fresh 
misunderstandings with Rome.* 

Cosimo was a bitter enemy of the Dominicans of 
S. Marco. He complained that in remembrance of 
Savonarola they nourished republican tendencies and 
supported the opposition to the Medici. By a stroke of 
arbitrary power they were made an end of at one blow ; 
on the 31st of August 1545 the Dominicans were expelled 
from S. Marco, S. Domenico at Fiesole, and S. Maria 
Maddalena at Mugnone because they had secretly har- 

* Desjardins, III., 25 seq. 

2 COSTANTINI, 402 seq. 

3 Lupo Gentile, Politica, 92 seq. 

* Ibid.., 93 seq. 


boured the exiles. The representations and complaints 
of the Pope at this proceeding were repudiated by 
Cosimo through his representative in the sharpest manner. 
Paul III. therefore brought before consistory in November 
a brief addressed to Cosimo threatening him with excom- 
munication if within three days of notification he did not 
reinstate the Dominicans who had been driven forth without 
form or trial. This time Cosimo gave in. The Dominicans 
were allowed to return, but the envoy Del Caccia was 
recalled from Rome.^ Only an agent named Francesco 
Babbi remained behind. 

By March 1 546 the quarrel between Rome and Florence 
was again in a blaze. The Dominicans of S. Marco 
complained that Cosimo had forbidden any alms to be ex- 
pended on the convent. Paul III. thereupon, on the 15th 
of March, made a strong protest, and Babbi, who lodged 
with the Im.perial ambassador, was put under arrest. For 
this the latter also now made a remonstrance. Cosimo, 
however, wrote a letter of justification to the College of 
Cardinals. Angry as Charles was at the Pope's severe 
proceeding, he yet counselled the Duke to show modera- 
tion, since a war between Rome and Florence would have 
been destructive of his plans in Germany. Vega exerted 
himself to bring about an agreement, which was reached 
in April.2 

From the remonstrances to Cosimo, as well as from 
other sources, it is evident that the war against the Protes- 
tants formed the central point of the Emperor's policy.^ 

1 Lupo Gentile, Politica, 97-102. Cf. Mondaini, La Storia di 
G. B. Adriani, Firenze, 1905, 31 seqq. 

2 By a brief of April 9, 1546, Paul IIL asked the Duke to sanction 
the collection of alms, which the latter at once agreed to (see Lupo 
Gentile, Politica, 114-115). 

3 See Nuntiaturberichte, VI IL, 57. 


Paul III. was in error when he doubted the Emperor's 
sincerity in this undertaking. But the Pope's apprehen- 
sions admit of explanation, since Charles even after his 
entry into Ratisbon continued to put off the signature 
of the treaty. The Emperor then disclosed to the nuncio 
Verallo that he must first obtain King Ferdinand's consent 
and know for certain what the Pope's concessions from the 
revenues of the Spanish Church would amount to. When 
the latter had come in, Charles declared that he could 
not sign the treaty until King Ferdinand had arrived. 
Verallo, who was unable to obtain any clue to the labyrin- 
thine policy of the Emperor,^ went through a painful time. 
Week after week went by and still no decision was 
reached; again and again it was reiterated that the Pope 
must still have patience. Verallo and Cardinal Truchsess 
were of opinion that Cardinal Farnese should appear once 
more in order to make all things clear. Farnese declined 
at first to undertake the journey, as he did not know 
whether his coming was wished for, and it seemed to all 
appearance as if the Emperor intended to give up the war.* 
At the beginning of May 1546 the outlook began at last 
to improve, Soto then informed Verallo that Charles, 
since King Ferdinand delayed his coming, only awaited 
the arrival of Duke William of Bavaria before ratifying the 
treaty. On the 6th of May Verallo wrote that the Emperor 
was altered and seemed now to think seriously of the 
war. In his subsequent despatches also he was able to 
report indications of a more favourable aspect of affairs. 
In the middle of May, Granvelle and Soto announced the 
prospect of a speedy decision, but still counselled reserve 
and close secrecy for yet a while longer. On the i8th 
Verallo had an audience of the Emperor, who still seemed 

» See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., vii. 
2 Ibid.^ IX., 8 seq., 11 seq., 21, 26, 29. 


as determined as ever to let things drift and to avoid the 
appearance of openly avowed measures.^ 

When afterwards, on the 21st of May, Cardinal Madruzzo 
arrived in Ratisbon, a ternnination seemed at last to be 
assured. To his astonishment Verallo now found himself 
excluded from the negotiations which were taking place. 
Together with Madruzzo, Cardinal Truchsess was, on the 
other hand, admitted. As the nuncio subsequently was in- 
formed, Charles V. was ready to sign the treaty of alliance 
in exact conformity with the second draft, but Madruzzo 
was bidden to lay before the Pope a further series of 
demands. Before all, the Emperor wished the Pope to 
make a special agreement binding himself in case of 
necessity to supply troops for a longer period, if possible 
up to the end of the war, or at least for a period of certainly 
eight months. He also asked for a further extension of 
the time, fixed in the original draft as six months from 
the finish of the campaign, for taking steps against dis- 
turbers of the military operations, i.e. the French. Charles 
hoped thus in a circuitous way to compass what he had 
earlier striven for in vain for years, a permanent alliance 
with the Pope against Francis. The old wish that the 
Papal subsidy should be raised from 200,000 to 300,000 
ducats was again expressed. Further demands included 
the Pope's permission to levy a half of the ecclesiastical 
revenues of the Netherlands, an appeal for more vigorous 
support from the Catholic Estates, especially the bishops, 
and the payment of the war funds, not in Augsburg and 
Venice, but in Ratisbon and Trent; finally, the Legatine 
dignity for the war was asked for Cardinal Madruzzo, the 
negotiator, and for Cardinal Farnese.^ 

^ See Verallo's letters in the Nuntiaturberichte. IX., 31: sfx^.^ 34 sn^.] 
40 seq.^ 42 seq., 44 seq. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, IX., ix-x. 


By the beginning of June all this was settled. Still a 
whole week went by before the treaty was signed. The 
cause of this fresh and final delay was that the negotiations 
with Bavaria lasted longer than Charles had expected. 
To gain the support of this power seemed to the Emperor 
an indispensable preliminary to his great undertaking. 
He thus secured a base of operations within the Empire, 
an arsenal and a provision store for the war.^ On the 7th 
of June 1546 a treaty was made in closest secrecy between 
Charles V., Ferdinand I., and Duke William of Bavaria. 
The last-named undertook to supply 10,000 gold gulden, 
to place a great portion of his artillery with ammunition 
at the Emperor's disposal, and to maintain the Imperialist 
troops at a moderate cost in his territories.^ 

On the same day on which this compact was agreed to 
the Emperor summoned Verallo to his presence and with 
exhortations to profound silence initiated him into the 
secret of his arrangements with Bavaria and Madruzzo, and 
declared himself ready to ratify the treaty with the Pope. 
With Verallo standing by, Charles affixed his signature 
to the document, dated the 6th of June.^ The treaty ran 
thus : " As Germany for many years, to its grievous hurt 
and in peril of total ruin, has been disturbed by erroneous 
teaching, and all remedies have proved fruitless, a General 
Council has assembled itself in Trent, the decisions of which 
are now rejected by the Protestants and the Schmalkaldic 
League. The Pope and Emperor have therefore deter- 
mined to combine in the following alliance for the glory ot 

* See RiEZLER, Gesch. Bayerns, IV., 342. ^ Ibid.^ ly^ seq. 

' See Verallo's *letter of June 7, 1 546, and that of Cardinal Truchs ss 
of June 9, both to Farnese, in Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 65 seq., 71 seq. 
The original treaty with the signature of Charles V. is in the Se ret 
Archives of the Vatican (Nunz. di Gerniania sotto Paolo III., Vol. 3) 
{cf. Zeitschr. fur Kirchengesch., IX., 135). 


God and the salvation of Christendom : The Emperor binds 
himself, after all friendly means have been unavailing, in 
the next month of June, with the aid of the Pope, to open 
war against the Protestants, the Schmalkaldic League, and 
other German teachers of error, in order to bring them back 
to the true and ancient religion, and to the obedience of the 
Holy See. The Emperor further binds himself, not, with- 
out the express consent of his Holiness or the Apostolic 
Legate, to make any terms of agreement with the above- 
named false teachers which can affect the reason and 
object of the present undertaking, or injure or prejudice its 
progress and success, and in particular to refrain from any 
concessions in matters of religion and the constitution of 
the Church. The Pope promises, within a month from the 
conclusion of the treaty, to deposit 100,000 ducats in 
Venice, which, with the 100,000 ducats at Augsburg, shall 
be spent exclusively by the commissaries of his Holiness 
on the purposes of the war. The Pope also engages to 
place, at his own charges, under the command of a Legate 
and necessary officers, 12,000 Italian infantry and 500 
light horsemen as auxiliary troops for six months, or up to 
the close of the campaign if it should be of shorter duration. 
He consents, in addition, to set apart for the war, for one 
year, half the ecclesiastical revenues of Spain, with a further 
500,000 ducats from the sale of conventual property. 
During the undertaking, and for six months afterwards, the 
contracting parties pledge themselves to render mutual assist- 
ance, should one or other of them be molested by a third 
party. Entrance into the alliance, which is to be confirmed 
by the Sacred College, lies open to the Catholic Estates of 
Germany, and to all Christian powers in general."^ 

' See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 575-578. A copy of the Imperial 

version of the treaty also in Cod. Barb., LVI., 107, f. wbseq., Vatican 

VOL. XIT. ig 


Cardinal Madruzzo was to deliver the treaty as ratified 
by Charles to the Pope, and to be the spokesman of the 
Emperor's further wishes. About midnight on the 7th-8th 
of June, Aurelio Cattaneo, the Cardinal's secretary, started 
for Rome to announce beforehand his master's coming. 
Madruzzo himself left early on the morning of the 8th, 
with such speed that he did not wait a moment for the docu- 
ments requisite for his mission. These were conveyed by 
an Imperial courier on the loth of June to the ambassador 

Verallo's reports from the ist to the 4th of June, which 
reached Rome on the 9th, finally dispelled the doubts 
which had never ceased to prevail in the Curia of the 
Emperor's firm intention of beginning the war. Cattaneo 
arrived on the evening of the 13th, followed on the i8th by 
the courier, whereupon Vega made haste to see the Pope. 
On the evening of the 19th of June Cardinal Madruzzo's 
arrival was also announced. He was received at once on 
the following morning, together with Vega, by the Pope. 
Paul III. seized this opportunity to complain of the long 
delay, and to bring up his old grievances against Charles V. : 
the keeping back of the Imperial recognition of Pier Luigi 
as Duke of Parma and Piacenza, the disputes over prize 
cases in Spain, the tenths in Naples, and the maintenance 
of the Pragmatic. Madruzzo was not slow in offering tran- 
quillizing assurances on all these points.^ 

As the consent of the Cardinals was one of the express 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 6g, n. i ; Venet. Depeschen, I., 520 ; 
cf. Kannengiesser, Karl V. und Maximilian Egmont, Graf von 
Biiren, Freiburg, 1895, 135 seq. The credentials prepared by 
Charles V. for Madruzzo and Vega, dated June 10, 1546, are given in 
Arch. Stor. Ital., 4th Series, XIX., 442 seq. 

2 See Druffel-Brandi, 580 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 88, n. I ; 
cf. ibid.y xi. 


conditions of the alliance, the treaty had to be laid before 
a general congregation. This took place on the 22nd of 
June in the palace of S. Marco, the summer residence of 
the Pope. The French and Venetian Cardinals raised 
such strong opposition that Paul III. found himself com- 
pelled to intervene personally in the discussion. He was 
supported in particular by Madruzzo, who was a warm 
advocate of the war. The opposition's chief objection was 
to the sale of the Spanish Church property ; at last it 
was generally agreed that this point should be allowed to 
drop, the Pope being left to his own discretion to find out 
some other equivalent. The treaty thereupon was accepted 
unanimously.^ In drafting the document, the alteration 
above mentioned was not taken into consideration, in order 
to avoid any fresh delay, only, at the end of the treaty 
a supplementary note was added that by the June named 
as the future starting-point of the campaign the current 
month of June 1546 was meant. In this form the docu- 
ment was signed on the 26th of June by Paul III. in the 
presence of Madruzzo and Vega. ^ The day before. Cardinal 
Farnese had been nominated in a consistory Legatus a latere 
to the Emperor and the army.^ On July the 4th a solemn 
ceremony took place in the Church of S. Maria in Aracoeli, 

^ Together with Maffei's report of June 23, 1 546, first made use of 
by DE Leva (IV., 67), see also the Acta Consist, and the other reports 
published by Friedensburg in the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 90, n. i, 
as well as Druffel-Brandi, 565, 582. The news of the acceptance 
of the treaty in consistory reached Ratisbon on July 3, 1546 (see 
Venet. Uepeschen, I., 561 ; ibid.^ 677, for the attempts of the Venetian 
ambassador in Rome to influence the Cardinals against the treaty 
with Charles). 

2 See Kannengiesser, Die Kapitulation zwischen Karl V. und 
Paul III. (reprinted from the Festschrift des Protest. Gymnasiums 
zu Strasbourg, 1888), 215 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 576-578. 

3 See Acta Consist, in the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 90, n. i. 


when Cardinal Farnese received the Legatine cross, and 
Ottavio Farnese was appointed commander-in-chief of the 
army and received the marshal's staff and the standard 
of war "against the Lutherans."^ The most complete 
arrangements for the conveyance of the subsidies and the 
equipment of the troops were made at once.^ There was 
all the greater necessity for despatch as the Emperor was 
placed in a position of great difificulty. 

Charles V. had from the beginning surveyed the coming 
events with the greatest circumspection. In a confidential 
letter to his sister Maria, of the 9th of June 1546, he 
described the situation as one that was most favourable to 
him. " The war against the Duke of Brunswick has drained 
the Protestant finances. In Saxony and Hesse the greatest 
discontent prevails both among the nobles and the other 
subjects, who are tired of being kept in grinding poverty 
and bitterest serfdom. Then the Protestants are split up 
into difterent sects, and ample help is promised by the 
Pope. Further, I have hopes even of inducing some of the 
Protestant princes, such as Maurice of Saxony and Albert 
of Brandenburg, to submit in matters of religion to the 
Council." He intended accordingly to begin the war by 
attacking the Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave of 
Hesse as destroyers of the public peace, and to justify 
his action by their conduct towards the Duke of Brunswick. 
Even if this pretext, he thought, did not prevent his 
opponents from thinking that the war was one of religion, 
yet it was through this pretext in any case that he would 
cut them off.' 

* See Acta Consist, in Ravnaldus, 1546, n. 105, and also other 
sources in the Nuntiaturberirhtc, IX., 98, n. I ; Casimiro, Aracoeli, 
328, must also be added. 

2 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xiv seq.^ 97 scq.^ 104 seq. 

3 Lanz, II., 486 jri^. 


At the same time, this first reckoning was to some 
extent mistaken. The Emperor certainly won over by 
secret agreements Duke Maurice of Saxony, the Margraves 
Hans of Brandenburg-Ciistrin and Albert of Brandenburg- 
Culmbach, and also secured the neutrality of the Elector 
Palatine and the Elector of Brandenburg ; but South 
Germany remained true to the Schmalkaldic League, and 
armed with such rapidity that they might have forestalled 
Charles's attack. Even before war was declared, the 
Emperor found himself in Ratisbon already in serious 
danger from his enemies. While his troops lay at great 
distances in the Netherlands, Italy, and Hungary, or were 
gathering at the recruiting grounds of South Germany, 
the foe already had at his disposal in the immediate 
neighbourhood squadrons and regiments fit to take the 

But the incapacity of the Schmalkaldic League was still 
greater than its strength. In the Commentaries, in which 
Charles enumerates with satisfaction the defects of his 
enemies, he speaks of them as if God had smitten them 
with blindness.^ 

As a matter of fact, the Schmalkaldic forces in the first 
weeks of the war might easily have obtained the victory 
if they had only understood in any degree how to avail 
themselves of the exceptionally great advantages of the 
situation. Their complete self-deception with regard to 
the attitude of Bavaria was of most momentous import to 
them. For long they never once suspected that Duke 
William IV. was in alliance with the Emperor, and even 
later never realized it with perfect certainty. They trusted 
Chancellor Eck that Bavaria would remain neutral and 
keep watch to see on which side fortune was leaning.^ In 

^ Commentaires, 127. 

* See RiEZLER, Gesch. Bayerns, IV., 350, 353, 354. 


consequence the bold dash of the first detachment of the 
Oberland Leaguers, led by Schartlin von Burtenbach and 
Schankwitz, was a failure. Their plan was to fall upon 
the Imperialist mustering-places in Upper Suabia, to seize 
the passes of the Tyrol, thus cutting off the Emperor's 
communications with Italy, and afterwards even to make 
a raid on the Council at Trent. On the 9th of July 
Schartlin had already taken Fussen, but durst not follow 
up the Imperialists as they retired over the adjacent 
Bavarian frontier, since the order had come from Augs- 
burg that they were not to push Bavaria into the arms of 
the enemy by a violation of the supposed neutrality of 
that power. Schankwitz on the night of July the loth 
captured the strong Ehrenberger pass near Reutte, and 
afterwards had already pressed on to Lermoos when he 
also received counter-orders. The council of war at Ulm 
did not wish to anger Ferdinand, of whose neutrality they 
had hopes. As any further advance of Schartlin's troops 
would become a source of danger to Ulm and Augsburg, 
he was obliged on July the 14th to fall back with all his 

The Schmalkaldic forces now turned their thoughts to an 
entire concentration of their military strength, to be followed 
by an advance on the Emperor, who was still sojourning in 
Ratisbon. On July the 20th Schartlin joined forces with 
the Wurtembergers and took Donauworth ; during the 
3rd and 4th of August the Saxons and Hessians came up 
to that city with the South German contingent. The 
approximate numbers of the Schmalkaldic army now 
amounted to 30,cxdo foot soldiers, 4600 horsemen, and 

* Cf. Ladurner, Der Einfall des Schmalkaldner in Tirol (Archiv 
fur Gesch. Tirols, I., 145 scq.); EGELHAAF, II., 467 seq.-, Janssen- 
Pastor, III., 1 8th ed., 627 seq. See also Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
109 seq,^ 113 seq.^ 117 seq. 


about a hundred guns.^ They greatly outnumbered the 

Charles V. had made use of the breathing-space given 
him by his enemies, by gathering about him reinforcements. 
By the 3rd of August he thought that Ratisbon might 
be abandoned without danger. On the 4th he entered 
Landshut, where he hoped to effect a conjunction with the 
auxiliary troops called out of Italy. For the Schmalkaldic 
army everything depended on preventing this combination. 
But even this favourable opportunity for snatching victory 
was allowed to slip through their hands ; not merely were 
they hindered at every step by consideration for Bavaria, 
but they were wanting in the self-sacrifice, spirit, and 
confidence which their cause demanded. Saxony and 
Hesse had brought no war funds ; they thought they 
had done enough in adding their troops to those of 
the South Germans. The cities were getting tired of 
paying out moneys, and thought that the Word of God 
cost much too dear, that it would have been better to 
have stayed at home and come to some compact with 
the Emperor. When the hopes of foreign assistance 
proved illusory, the boastful assurances of victory with 
which they had started gave place to deep despond- 
ency. To the want of the necessary money, for which 
the plunder of churches and convents did not suffice, 
there was added the lack of unity among their leaders. 
What the impetuous Landgrave wished was displeas- 
ing to the slow-moving Elector ; what Schartlin von 
Burtenbach counselled was rejected by both.^ Before the 
Schmalkaldic leaders had come to a decision, Charles 

* See the investigations of Le Mang, Die Darstellung der Schmal- 
kaldischen Krieges in den Denkwiirdigkeiten Karls V., I., Jena, 1890, 
25, n. 7, 61, n. I. 

2 Cf. Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., t-^Z sec 


had joined hands with the expedition sent out of Italy 
by the Fope.^ 

This consisted of io,ooo infantry and more than 700 
light cavalry. The latter, with Giovanni Battista Savelli 
at their head, entered Landshut on the 7th of August ; the 
infantry appeared three days later, but were so exhausted 
by the long march that a rest was imperative. The 
commander-in-chief, Ottavio Farnese, waited on Charles V. 
on the nth of August, and was received with the utmost 
marks of respect ; two days later the order of the Golden 
Fleece was conferred upon him. He afterwards paraded 
his troops before the Emperor, who was highly delighted 
with their eminently soldierly appearance. " The men," 
wrote Verallo to Rome, " have surpassed all our expecta- 
tions."* By this accession of strength and other reinforce- 
ments Charles was now numerically superior to his 
enemies, against whom he now published the Ban dated 
the 20th of July.^ 

On the 26th of August Charles occupied a well-fortified 
camp on the plains before the Bavarian frontier fortress, 
of Ingolstadt. The enemy directed their fire on city and 
camp, but did not venture on an open attack. Their 
retirement, which began on September the 4th, was in 
glaring contradiction to the bombastic and insulting 
language of the letter of defiance which they had just 
delivered to the Emperor. Thus in the moral scale also 

* The French court had counted it a certainty that the Schmalkaldic 
League would prevent this ; see the *letter of Bishop Dandino of 
Iinola to the Cardinal Camerlengo, dat. Fontainebleau, Aug. 8, 1546, 
Nunz. di Francia, 2 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xxii seq.^ 186 seq. ; cf. also Mocenigo 
in the Fontes rer. Austr., XXX., 125 seq., who criticises severely the 
choice of commanders {cf. p. 137). The names of all the captains of 
the Italian auxiliaries in Manente, 285 seq. 

2 See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 185, 197. 


Charles was superior.^ Failure also attended the attempt of 
the Schmalkaldic forces to cut off the supports coming to 
the Emperor from the Netherlands under the command of 
Maximilian Egmont, the Count of Biiren. On the 15th 
of September Egmont's force joined that of the Emperor, 
who had now at his disposal over 50,000 infantry and 
14,000 cavalry.2 Notwithstanding his superiority, Charles 
was determined not to stake all on one throw ; his plan 
was rather to keep the enemy in check and wear him out 
financially. The situation of the latter grew worse; the 
help which they had solicited from Denmark, France, and 
England never came, while even their strong hope that the 
Turks would open a way of relief to them was unfulfilled. 
The Emperor took Donauworth, Dillingen, and Lauingen ; 
the Schmalkaldic forces fell back until they took up their 
position about the middle of October in a fortified camp to 
the north of Ulm near Giengen. Here they remained 
inactive for six weeks while Charles lay encamped at 
Lauingen. Many fell victims on both sides to disease, 
the rough autumnal German weather telling with special 
severity on the unacclimatized Spaniards and Italians ; the 
latter troops gradually melted away from sickness and 
desertion.^ The Emperor refused to be drawn into a 
battle; his dogged caution was to crown his banners 
with victory. 

At the end of October a new aspect of the Emperor's 
widespread plans was disclosed. Duke Maurice of Saxony 

* See RiEZLER in Der Abhandl. der bayr. Akad. der Wissensch., 
XXI. (1895), 211 ; Bezold, 780; Egelhaaf, II., 470; Lenz in the 
Histor. Zeitschr., LXXVL, 467. 

2 Cf. KannengiesSER, Karl V. und Maximilian Egmont, Graf von 
Biiren, Freiburg, 1895. 

^ For the wholesale desertion of Italians on the departure of Cardinal 
Farnese, see Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 310, n. i, 312, n. 2. 


declared war against his cousin John Frederick, and put 
into execution the Ban which had been pronounced against 
him. It was not, however, by the Saxon catastrophe 
that the war was decided against the fortunes of the 
Schmalkaldic League, but by their financial necessities. 
" The promised French money," wrote Philip of Hesse, 
"did not come. Wurtemberg and the cities cannot and 
will not give any, Saxony and ourselves have none; 
therefore we must give in."^ On the 23rd of November 
the confederates broke up at Giengen. The Landgrave 
made haste home through Wurtemberg "to his two 
wives," as Schartlin scornfully remarked ; the Elector 
plundered on his way back weak dependencies of the 
Empire, whether, like Gmiind, Mayence, and Fulda, they 
were Catholic, or, like Frankfort, Protestant.^ 

The retreat of the Schmalkaldic forces quite unexpectedly 
made the Imperialist troops, who from wet, cold, and sick- 
ness were in a very precarious position, masters of the field. 
The war on the Danube was brought to a victorious close 
without a battle, almost without a skirmish, through 
the circumspection and iron persistency of Charles, who 
had displayed throughout great tranquillity and confidence. 
Seldom was a contest begun on the one side with greater 
braggadocio and carried out with greater incompetency. 
The strange spectacle was witnessed of an army originally 
the stronger retreating without having struck a blow, 
finally separating and hurrying homewards in rapid flight. 

Scarcely had the Emperor entered on his victory than the 
cities and princes of southern Germany began to compete 
in abject entreaties for grace and pardon. Charles V. for- 

» Rommel, Urkundenbuch, 262-263 ; cf. Egelhaaf, II., 475 seq. ; 
Histor. Zeitschr., XXXVI., 76 ; LXXVII., 468. 

2 See Janssen-Pastor, III., 18th ed., 648 seq.\ cf. Nuntiatur- 
berichte, IX., 364 seq., 375. 


gave, but he made the guilty pay roundly for the cost of war. 
In matters of religion he believed that at first in southern 
Germany general toleration must be observed.^ This 
position, in which the Pope justly saw a violation of 
the treaty of June, was followed by other questions also 
which led afresh to serious breaches of amity with the 
Holy See. 

1 See Janssen-Pastor, III., l8th ed., bsoseq. ; Egelhaaf, II., 477. 


Dissensions between Paul III. and Charles V. 

The insecurity of the foundations on which the friendship 
between Charles V. and Paul III. rested was shown by 
the circumstance that, while the signatures of the treaty 
of June 1546 were scarcely dry, fresh differences emerged. 
The old suspicions and exorbitant demands on the part 
of the Emperor raised barriers in all directions to a 
permanent understanding, 

Charles V., in the first place, was offended that Paul III., 
in spite of the pleadings of Cardinal Madruzzo, would not 
consent to an extension in time of the obligations laid 
upon him by the treaty. Madruzzo, on the other hand, 
obtained the Pope's consent to the wishes of Charles with 
regard to the disbursement of the moneys in Trent and 
the attribution of the half of the ecclesiastical revenues of 
the Netherlands.^ Nevertheless, the Emperor was not 
satisfied. From the first he had assiduously placed the 
political motives for his hostile action against the Pro- 
testants in the foreground, while endeavouring to veil, 
in fact to repudiate, the religious motives. Since there 
were cogent reasons for this behaviour, he could not but 
feel aggrieved that in Rome the ecclesiastical objects of 
the war in common were emphasized unceasingly, and in 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xii seq. ; cf.ibid., 154, n. i., the Bull, 
dated already Aug. 11, 1546, relating to the Church revenues of the 



the briefs to the Kings of France and Poland, the Doge 
of Venice, the German archbishops and bishops, and the 
University of Louvain an open summons was given to a 
crusade against the German heretics.^ In reply to this, how- 
ever, the Pope could point out that Charles V. himself had 
demanded that the treaty should be discussed in consistory ; 
and that the briefs, at the urgent request of the German 
ambassador, had been so discussed before they were sent 
off.2 The Emperor's complaint that the treaty of June 
had been communicated to the Swiss Confederation was 
justified. In this way the German Protestants received 
authentic information concerning the object of the blow 
directed against them, and they did not hesitate to use the 
weapon placed in their hands to incite their co-religionists. 
The breach of confidence which this involved was inexcus- 
able, and can only be explained on the assumption that 
Paul III., never free from suspicion, wished to make any 
agreement between Charles and the Protestants impossible.^ 
How little confidence was placed in the Emperor is 
evident from the fact that Verallo in the beginning of 
August 1546 recommended some consideration to be 
shown for his wishes in the affairs of the Council, since 
otherwise it was to be feared that some hurtful agreement 
might be made with the Protestants and Granvelle's threat 
of a national council be carried out.* Under these cir- 

1 See Raynaldus, 1546, n. 58 seq., and Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 98, 
n. 2, 122. 

2 See Farnese's letters in Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 457, 465 seq. 
That the Protestants must have become aware of the alliance through 
the discussions in consistory is insisted upon by Brosch in the 
Mitteil. des Osterr. Instituts, XXIII., 136. Cf. also DE Leva, IV., 159. 

^ Cf. Janssen-Pastor, III., 1 8th ed., 622 ; Kannengiesser, Die 
Kapitulation zwischen Karl V. und Paul III., 23 seq.', Nuntiatur- 
berichte, IX., xxxii. 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 172. 


cumstances the nuncio and his master in Rome looked 
with misgiving on the cautious policy of Charles and his 
attempts to win over a portion of his adversaries by 

The Pope's distrust, eagerly fomented by the French,* 
was in reality not unjustified, for the guarantees in matters 
of religion by which Duke Maurice of Saxony, the 
Margraves Hans von Brandenburg-Ciistrin and Albert of 
Brandenburg-Culmbach were gained, could not be brought 
into accord with the treaty of June.^ If Paul III. had 
heard of these agreements at once he might then have 
complained with much greater right of the non-fulfilment 
of the treaty, as Charles did with regard to the immediate 
payment of the war funds. The difficulties in this con- 
nection, as well as those regarding the compensation for 
the alienation of the Spanish Church property objected 
to by the Cardinals, were removed in essential points by 
the arrival of Farnese accredited as Cardinal-Legate to the 
forces. He was not, however, in a position to prevent 
further disputes over the management of the Italian 
auxiliaries and delays in their payment.^ 

Farnese, who had his first audience on arrival on the 
24th of August 1546, also presented to the Emperor the 
Bull agreeing to the conveyance of the half of the ecclesi- 
astical revenues of the Netherlands. Charles V. thanked 
him, but declined to comply with the Legate's request of 
the 29th of August that he would openly declare the war 
to be a religious one. With regard to a series of minor 
contentions the Emperor promised redress.* He did not, 
however, go beyond fair words. The pettiness of Charles 

' See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 107, n. i. 

2 Cf. Janssen-Pastor, III., 1 8th ed., 622-624. 

' Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xxx seq. 

♦ Ibid.,20i,seq.^ 212 seq. 


in shelving any arrangement in matters of trifling conse- 
quence caused an annoyance which was all the more bitter 
as the Pope was conscious that in all primary points he 
had discharged his heavy obligations. 

Paul III. and his family had to learn that the hopes 
which they had cherished of greater consideration on the 
Emperor's part for their private wishes were not in the 
way of realization. The disappointment was all the greater 
as they had reckoned on the Emperor's gratitude for the 
very substantial assistance brought to him at a most 
critical moment by the Papal troops.^ Instead of this, 
Granvelle came forward with reiterated complaints of the 
communication of the treaty to the Swiss. Charles V., 
however, showed himself only too much inclined to lay 
the personal responsibility for the daily grievances arising 
among the Italian soldiery on the Pope himself, who, he 
thought, was intentionally causing him difficulties in all 

The extraordinary distrust with which the two heads of 
Christendom regarded each other, although the general 
situation demanded imperatively the best understanding, 
received its worst illustration in their mutual attitude over 
the affairs of the Council. 

The war between the Emperor and the Schmalkaldic 
League was bound to react upon the Synod in session at 
Trent. The news of the capture of the Ehrenberger pass 
by Schartlin von Burtenbach had caused such terror in that 

* Cf. in Appendix, No. 31, Cardinal G. Gonzaga's *letter of July 23, 
1546 (Vatican Library). 

"- See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xxi, 227. Friedensburg observes on the 
mutual distrust of Charles V. and Paul III.: "Neither of the two 
trusted the other ; each stood suspiciously on his guard and scrutinized 
closely the steps of his partner, always anxious lest the latter should 
gain an advantage over him, and therefore disinclined to make any 
concession above and beyond what was absolutely necessary." 


city that many of the Fathers thought of immediate flight.^ 
On July the isth, 1546, as the doctrine of justification had 
now undergone thorough examination, four bishops were 
appointed in the general congregation to draw up the 
decree on that subject. The discussion then proceeded, in 
the course of which Cardinal Pacheco spoke. But when it 
came to the turn of Archbishop Jacopo Cauco of Corfu, 
the latter declared that he had not supposed that they 
would be discussing justification that day, but more 
probably, in view of the danger from the war, a removal 
or a suspension of the Council. The Archbishops of Siena 
and Matera^ also dwelt upon the danger. The Legates 
themselves, in a letter of the 25th of June 1546 to Cardinal 
Farnese, had called attention to the distressing situation 
of the Council. They said it was neither decorous nor 
without danger to remain so close to the assembling of 
troops and fanatical enemies. There were no means in 
Trent of repelling an attack threatened by friends of the 
Lutheran party in the Grisons, an attack which was all the 
more sure of success as that canton had sympathizers 
in Trent itself, Verona, Vicenza, and other neighbouring 
places. But even the soldiery who were friendly to them 
would be burdensome owing to the decreasing supply of 
provisions ; they covered the country like hordes of locusts ; 
an assembly of defenceless clergy would be in a sad plight 
under such circumstances. It seemed at the least a hard 
demand to make upon them that amid such anxieties they 
should devote their attention to conciliar deliberations.^ 

The Pope, however, was not at all well pleased with the 
Legates' suggestion that the seat of the Council should be 
removed. The Emperor had repeatedly made known his 

1 Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 560. 

" Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 89 ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 5. 

« Druffel-Brandi, 566 ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 5. 

THE pope's instructions. 305 

wish that the Council during the war should under any 
circumstances continue assembled in Trent.^ Paul III. 
was determined not to embroil himself at any price with 
Charles over this question at the very moment when he 
had entered into alliance with him to bring the Protestants 
into forcible submission to the Council. The Legates 
therefore received orders to remain in Trent, and to proceed 
with the deliberations. How disagreeable such instructions 
were is shown by a letter from Cervini to the Papal 
secretary Mafifei of the 8th of July. Cervini declared that 
he bowed to the Pope's will, but expressed his fear that the 
time might come when it would be the business of the 
mail-clad Emperor to prescribe to the Council the course 
of its proceedings. Yet the Pope held fast by his deter- 
mination, once for all expressed, that he would not for a 
moment consent to the proposal of the Legates that the 
sessions should be suspended on account of the approach- 
ing passage of troops ; ^ on the other hand, he was not 
willing to meet the further wish of the Emperor, who was 
still pressing for a cessation of the dogmatic discussions. 
As long as the Synod in Trent remained open, it must 
continue, in accordance with the Pope's wishes, to carry 
out its tasks fully. 

On the 2 1st of July Paul gave instructions to Cardinal 
Farnese, then on his way to join as Legate the Imperial 
army, that he might represent to Charles, if the latter de- 
manded the avoidance of dogmatic questions, that such an 
interruption of the activities of the Council would only 
then be possible if the Council were transferred to some 
other spot.^ 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xxxiii, 70. 

* Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 5. 

* See Cardinal Santafiora's letter to Farnese of July 21, 1546, in 
Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 135 seq. On July 23 the same Cardinal wrote 



The timorous Cervini again broached the subject of 
removal when Cardinal Farnese as Legate passed through 
the southern Tyrol with the Papal troops. Farnese's ill- 
ness at Rovereto gave Cervini an opportunity of discuss- 
ing the matter with him thoroughly. As Cardinal Ercole 
Gonzaga informed Camillo Capilupi, Cervini set before the 
Legate in such vivid colours the danger of Charles becoming 
supreme over the Council, as he would be supreme in the ap- 
proaching war, that Farnese was won over to the proposal for 
a removal of the Council, and in that sense reported to Rome.^ 
It seems that hopes were entertained there that Charles 
might be induced to give his consent to a removal. This 
certainly was not to be thought of now; Charles clung to 
his determination that the Council should be a dummy to 
serve as a prop for his scheme of policy. If the Pope 
thought that this was more than he could consent to, his 
reasons were not difficult to understand. It would be 
beneath his dignity and a thing impossible in itself to 
require the Fathers of the Council to regulate their conduct 
by the dilatory course of German affairs and sit idle in 
Trent squandering time and money until the cast of the 
iron dice should have decided the Schmalkaldic vvar.^ 

As Cardinal Cervini was lingering by the sick-bed 
of Farnese in Rovereto and Pole had gone on already 
on the 28th of June to recuperate his feeble health at 

again that the Pope consented to a translation, but only in case of 
necessity, and if a continuance at Trent was actually impossible. In 
case too long a time would be required to enable him personally to 
make the necessary representations to the Emperor, he gave per- 
mission to send a prelate of high standing to Charles V., entrusted 
with this task. Ferrara and Lucca were to be proposed to the Emperor 
as suitable places {ibid.^ IX., 141 seq.). 

1 Cf. Cardinal E. Gonzaga's *letter to C. Capilupi of Aug. 13, 1546, 
Cod. Barb. Lat., 5793, f. I57^ Vatican Library. 

2 Cf. Ehses in the Rom. Quartalschr., XIX., 182. 


Padua,* Cardinal del Monte was left the sole President of 
the Council, His position was not an enviable one. See- 
ing that the Pope was opposed to any postponement of the 
sittings, he had proposed in the general congregation of the 
28th of July to hold the session and there publish the dog- 
matic decree as it stood. Pacheco, on the contrary, with 
the almost unanimous consent of the Fathers, asked for a 
postponement of the session, and that too contrary to the 
view taken by del Monte that the prorogation should be 
indefinite. In opposition to Pacheco, the Archbishops 
of Corfu and Matera, Cauco and Saraceni, declared them- 
selves in favour of a translation of the Council. The 
former remarked that to stay in Trent under the existing 
conditions was to tempt Providence and to inflict great 
indignity on the whole Church ; moreover, he had no doubt 
that if the Emperor were informed of the true state of 
affairs he certainly would be the first to approve of a re- 
moval of the Council to some safer place. At these words 
he was violently interrupted by Cardinal Pacheco exclaim- 
ing : " Speak to the business in hand, and do not digress 
upon the intentions of the Emperor, of which you know 
nothing." Cardinal del Monte, to whom the Archbishop's 
utterance of opinion had been by no means displeasing, 
refrained from calling the latter to order, and thereby 
brought on a passage of words between himself and Pacheco. 
The latter displayed no little excitement. Some of the 
Spanish bishops emulated him in violence of language, and 
it taxed the Legate to the utmost to restore calm.^ In a 

* As Pole's illness was protracted he was released on Oct. 27, 1546, 
from his Legatine duties and recalled to Rome (Pallavicini, 1. 8, 
c. 7). It is certain that then, and for some time longer, Pole was in 
very bad health owing to the climate of Trent (see Reumont in 
Theol. Literaturbl., 1870, 997). 

2 Severoli, ed. Merkle, 1 , 95-97 ; Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 7. 


letter of July the 29th the conciliar Legates represented to 
Verallo that, in view of the war, a removal of the Council 
seemed advisable, as otherwise it was to be feared that it 
might dissolve itself. They named as suitable places 
Ferrara or Lucca.^ 

On the 30th of July the general congregation continued 
the discussion of the decree on justification. At the close 
of the sitting Pacheco again demanded the appointment of 
a fixed day for the next sitting. As del Monte, who was 
again sole President, opposed him, the Imperialist Cardinals 
Madruzzo and Pacheco attacked him in the most reckless 
fashion. Madruzzo allowed himself to go so far as to 
accuse del Monte of conduct unbecoming a Christian, 
taunting him at last on his plebeian origin. The assembly 
broke up amid great excitement without having come to 
any decision.^ 

This outburst on the part of the Imperialists was exactly 
calculated to precipitate what, in the interests of Charles V., 
they wished to prevent. Del Monte, deeply chagrined at 
the contempt of his authority, was now more than ever in 
favour of a removal of the Council from Trent, where the 
authority of an Imperial master seemed to be quite as 
dangerous as the peril from foreign enemies. Madruzzo 
himself perceived that his anger had carried him too far; 
Cervini, on his return from Rovereto on the 31st of July, 
made warm representations to him. The incident was also 
made the subject of conversation with the Cardinal-Legate 
Farnese, who arrived in Trent on the 2nd of August. The 
result was surprising. On the 3rd of August Bishop Pietro 
Bertano of Fano, as representing not the Council but the 
Legates only, yet with the approval of Madruzzo and 
Pacheco, was sent to the Imperial court with the object of 

» Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 155 seq. 

« Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., gS-icxj ; Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 7. 


favourably disposing Charles to the removal of the Council 
to Ferrara, Lucca, or Siena.^ On the following day Achilla 
de' Grassi was despatched to Rome to inform the Pope 
more thoroughly of the state of affairs. Bertano did not 
get far. In Brixen he met Aurelio Cattaneo, secretary to 
the Cardinal of Trent, returning from the Emperor's court. 
From him he received so vivid an account of the irritation 
shown by Charles at the proposal to translate the Council ^ 
that he was convinced of the futility of his mission and on 
August the 4th turned back to Trent. De' Grassi also was 
recalled thither by a special messenger, to be again sent forth 
on the 6th of August with the most recent information. 
He was the bearer of a letter to the Pope from Cervini, 
dated August the 5th, containing a report of the threatening 
language in which the Emperor had inveighed against him.^ 
At the same time the Legates forwarded to Verallo a 
document of the 5th of August exculpating themselves, 
and Cervini in particular, from the charge of endeavouring 
to bring about the dissolution of the Council,* On the 7th 
of August Bertano also left for Rome, sent by Madruzzo.^ 

* His instructions are in Nuntiaturberichle, IX., 589 seq. 

2 Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed, Merkle, I., 565. For the Emperor's 
anger and his repeated threats of vengeance on Cervini, whom he 
considered the chief culprit in the matter of the translation of the 
Council, cf. also Verallo's reports : to Farnese, July 30, 1 546 
(Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 163 seq.)-, to the Legates, July 31 {ibid., 163 
seq., n.); to Santafiora, Aug. 7 {ibid., 177 seq. ; here an utterance of 
Granvelle is reported repeating the threat of a national council). 
On Aug. 12 Mendoza spoke to the Legates about the Emperor's 
temper (Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 566). 

3 Cf. Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 565 ; PALLAViciNr, 
1. 8, c. 8,n, 3 ; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 179 seq., n. 4. Besides Cervini's 
letter to the Pope of Aug. 5 (not 15), cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 163, 
n. 2 ; Merkle, I., 567, n. i. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 590-592. 

^ Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 566. 


In the meantime, on the night of August the 7th, 
Montemerlo, Farnese's secretary, had arrived in Trent. He 
brought to the Legates, together with a letter from Cardinal 
Santafiora of the 3rd and 4th of August, in which Lucca was 
recommended, a Bull dated the ist of August 1546 con- 
veying full powers, in the case of prolonged continuance in 
Trent becoming impossible, to translate the Synod to some 
more suitable place with the consent of the Fathers or of a 

Montemerlo was also authorized to show a letter from 
Santafiora to Verallo in which the latter was instructed to 
inform the Emperor of the proposed translation, while 
avoiding any appearance of soliciting his approval. The 
Legates were to use their discretion whether this open 
letter should be forwarded or not to its destination.^ The 
Imperialist Cardinals and Mendoza received the com- 
munication with strong disapproval. Farnese, with the 
consent of the Legates, came to an understanding with 
them that neither should the translation be decided upon 
nor the letter to Verallo forwarded until they had once 
more received a reply from the Pope to the reports to be 
presented to him by Farnese and the Legates , in the 
meanwhile, the Council was to continue its labours in the 
congregations.^ The plan of bringing the question of 
translation before the next general congregation was 
abandoned by the Legates on the receipt of a written 

* Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 170 seg.,n. 2; see also Pallavicini, 
I. 8, c. 8, n. 4. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 171, n. 

' Farnese to Paul III., dat. Trent, Aug. 9, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, 
IX., 179-182) ; the Legates to Santafiora, dat. Aug. 9, 1546 (Nuntiatur- 
berichte, 181 seg., n. 3). Cervini in a confidential letter to Maffei 
written at this time urged that the present opportunity should not be 
neglected and no postponement be permitted {idt'd., 182, n.). 


expostulation from Farnese, who had left Trent on 
the loth of August. On the contrary, del Monte, on the 
13th of August, after an introductory address tending to 
allay the apprehensions of the Fathers for their safety in 
Trent, ordered the discussion of the decree on justification 
to be resumed.^ 

A letter of Bishop de' Nobili of Accia is descriptive of the 
situation then existing. He speaks strongly of the great 
disinclination of the Legates and a large number of the 
Fathers to see the work of the Synod obstructed by the 
Emperor's insistence that the decree on justification should 
not take shape out of consideration for the Protestants. 
It is matter of complaint, writes de' Nobili, that the Council 
has been deprived of its freedom, many Fathers on that 
account have left, others make the best of the situation.^ 
In letters to Santafiora of the i6th and 17th of August 
the Legates complain that the Imperialists assiduously 
protract the work of the sittings, and beg to be removed 
from their posts.^ 

Paul III. displayed great indignation on hearing Cattaneo 
and Bertano's account of the attitude of Charles V. and of 
his threatening language towards Cervini. He also spoke 
very angrily of Madruzzo, accusing him of having incited 
the Emperor against the Legates.* It was only with great 
reluctance that the Pope made up his mind to defer the 
translation of the Council for a while. Already on the 
i6th of August he had, through Santafiora, renewed the 
authority given to the Legates to take tW* step, provided 
it conformed to the voice of the majority. They were, 

* Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 566 seq. ; Pallavicini, 
1. 8, c. 8, n. 5. 

2 See Ehses in the Rom. Quartalschr., XIX., 182. 

3 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 183, n. ; Mfrkle. I., 568, n. 2. 

♦ Pallavicini, I. 8, c. 10, n. 2. 


however, if possible, without delaying the opportunity for 
removal, to proceed as far as they could with the decrees 
on justification and the residence of bishops and to have 
them settled in their entirety or in part.^ On the follow- 
ing day, however, news reached Rome that in the event of 
a translation the Emperor intended to come to an under- 
standing with the Protestants, or to take steps to constitute 
a national council. Upon this the Pope resolved, all con- 
vinced though he was of the necessity of a translation, 
to meet the Emperor so far as to detain the Council at 
Trent for some time longer and to settle the decrees under 
consideration. Farnese was to use his influence to obtain 
from Charles a declaration that he would consent to the 
translation taking place at the end of September or the 
middle of October. The Legates in the meantime were to 
secure the consent of the prelates so as to be certain of 
having a majority in favour of the translation at any time 
at which the Pope might announce a fresh decision 
respecting it. These instructions were communicated to 
Farnese and the Legates on the 17th of August.^ On the 
24th Santafiora wrote to Farnese ^ that the Council must 
be moved at the latest by the end of October ; the Emperor 

» Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 191, n. i. On Aug. 14, 1546, Vine. 
Parenzi wrote from Rome to Lucca, that Lucca was one of the four 
cities in which eventually the Council would be held. The Govern- 
ment of Lucca wrote on Aug. 20 to Cardinal Guidiccioni requesting 
him to ask the Pope to omit their city from the number (State 
Archives, Lucca). The pros and cons for holding the Council in 
Ferrara were considered in a *letter from Cardinal E. Gonzaga, dat. 
Mantua, Aug. 17, 1546, Cod. Barb. Lat., 5793, f. 161 seq. (Vatican 

2 Santafiora to Farnese, dat. Aug. 17, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
191-193) ; Santafiora to the Legates {ibid., 193, n. i) ; cf. Pallavicini, 
1. 8, c 10, n. 2. 

8 Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 202 seq. 


must also be led to ponder the danger of a schism arising if 
the aged Pope were to die while the Council sat at Trent.^ 
The Legates, taking into consideration the repugnance 
shown by the prelates to a much longer continuance in 
Trent, would gladly have taken their votes at once in the 
general congregation on the question of translation and 
then have awaited the subsequent orders of the Pope.^ 
They would not have been displeased even if the order 
prohibiting the Fathers to leave the Council on their own 
initiative had been relaxed, so that the necessity of a 
translation to avoid dissolution from within might have 
been proved by facts. But the Pope, mindful of the 
negotiations with the Emperor then in the air, refused 
his assent to both suggestions.^ The negotiations led to 
nothing. Farnese attempted in vain in an audience on 
the 29th of August in the camp at Ingoldstadt to win the 
Emperor's approval of a translation to Lucca.* Charles 
explained to the Legate that the presence of the Council 
in Trent was exactly the one thing essential to the assured 
success of his operations in the field, so that Farnese for 
the moment could only declare that he would advise the 

* Pallavicini (1. 8, c. 12, n. 2) thinks that the principal reason, 
although not openly expressed in their correspondence with Rome, which 
led the Legates to wish for a translation of the Council was their 
anxiety lest the Pope should die suddenly. In that case the freedom 
of election would be endangered if the Council were being held in a 
place where the influence of the princes was so powerful. 

2 The Legates to Farnese, dat. Aug. 20, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte 
IX., 193, n. 3). 

3 Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 10, n. 3. 

* Farnese to Paul III., dat. Ingolstadt, Aug. 30, 1546 (Nuntiatur- 
berichte, IX., 210-212). That Lucca, in the letter to Santafiora of 
Aug. 28 (Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 8, n. 2), had already written to decline, 
could not yet have been known to Farnese {cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX , 
210, n. 5). Further discussion took place on Sept. 3 between Granve'Je 
and Verallo in place of the sick Legate {ibid., 222-224), 


Pope to order the Synod to continue its sittings there for 
some weeks longer, under the assumption that it was now 
a certainty that after that the translation might be under- 
taken. To the conciliar Legates Farnese wrote on the 
31st of August^ that for the present they must not move 
in the matter. Cardinal Truchsess of Augsburg also 
warned them with reference to existing circumstances, in 
a letter of the 31st of August, what the consequences of 
a translation would be.^ Farnese found the Emperor, in 
consequence of the tardy progress of the war, in a less 
uncompromising mood on September the 8th.^ The latter 
still declared that under the conditions of the moment 
all talk of a translation was out of the question, but he 
thought that perhaps later on the matter might admit of 
discussion when it had become apparent what the further 
course of the campaign would be. 

The Pope was exceedingly mortified by the attitude of 
Charles V. In the beginning of September he remarked in 
a discussion with the ambassador Vega : " You have not 
yet been victorious over the Protestants, and neverthe- 
less your demands are already insupportable ; what will 
your first step be when the Emperor is victorious ?..."* 
Paul III. was unshaken in his determination that the 
translation should take place, and on the 1 1 th of September,^ 
in his reply to Farnese's first report, bade him repeatedly 
call attention to its necessity, adducing in particular, among 
other reasons, the danger of schism in the case of his 

» Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 10, n. 4. 

2 Ibid. 

^ Cf. Verallo to Santafiora, dat. Sept. 11, 1546, and Farnese to 
Santafiora, dat. Sept. 11, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 236 seq^. 

* Campana, 503. 

6 Santafiora to Farnese, dat. Sept. 11, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 


death.* On the 15th of September the Pope ordered a 
letter to be sent to the Legates ^ making urgent inquiries 
as to the prospects of a majority when the question came 
up for decision by the votes of the Council. On the 20th 
of September, Paul III., after an interview with the Imperial 
ambassador to discuss the Emperor's objection to the 
translation, directed Santafiora to write ^ that he still held 
by his opinion that the removal ought to take place by the 
middle of October; this Farnese was at liberty to com- 
municate to the Emperor, who would apprecia'te the Pope's 
reasons, with which he was already previously acquainted. 
The conciliar Legates were again, in a letter from Santa- 
fiora of the 22nd of September,* requested to state what 
result they anticipated on submitting the question to the 
vote in the middle of October. In the meantime they 
were to push on as far as possible the decree on justifica- 
tion as well as that on episcopal residence, so that it 
might not appear as if the Council were going to rise from 
its labours in order to evade reform. 

Further difficulties at this time were raised, to the Pope's 
annoyance, by Francis I./ who refused to consent to the 
choice of an Imperial city, but on the contrary wished the 
Council to be transferred to Avignon whither, he promised, 
he could induce even the English and Lutherans to come. 

1 Cf. also Maffei's letter to Farnese, dat. Oct. 14, 1546 (Nun- 
tiaturberichte, IX., 288, n. i). 

2 Santafiora to the Legates, dat. Sept. 15, 1546 (extract, ibid., 
246, n. 2). 

3 Cf. ibid., 264, n. I. 

* Cf. ibid. The letter was brought to Trent on Sept. 26 by Vega's 
secretary, Marquina, who, at the ambassador's bidding, was on his 
way to the Imperial court. 

^ Maffei to Cervini, dat. Sept. 19, 1546 {cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. jo, 
n. 6); Mafifei to Farnese, dat. Oct. 6, 1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 


On the 2nd of October Maffei wrote to Farnese ^ that in 
his opinion the Pope, in case of necessity, would decide on 
a further postponement of the translation in order to 
avoid the convocation of a national council by the 
Emperor or something even worse than that; Farnese, 
however, was to do all he could to overcome the opposition 
of the monarch ; the latter might hand over the manage- 
ment of religious matters to the Pope, just as the Pope had 
left the management of the war to his Majesty. As the 
month of October was half over without any fresh news 
coming from Farnese concerning the matter, the Pope had 
conveyed to him the expression of his astonishment and 
the reiterated intimation that the time was now fully come 
to proceed on the grounds already mentioned. ^ 

The Legates on their part were now no longer willing to 
take upon themselves the responsibility of deciding on the 
question of translation through the votes of the Council.^ 
On the contrary, they proposed on the 9th of October* that 
the Pope should suspend the Council after the close of the 
approaching sitting and then summon the prelates to Rome 
in order to establish the remaining reforms with their 
approval and consent. A principal reason for this 
proposal was the repeated opposition, on the part of the 
Imperialist prelates, to the further consideration of the dog- 
matic decrees which the Legates had to encounter at this 
time. Paul III.'s treatment of this proposal was vacillating, 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 272. 

2 Santafiora to Farnese, dat. Oct. 14, 1546 {ibid.^ 287 seq>j. On 
Oct. 14, 18, and 20 Verallo reported to Santafiora on his and Farnese's 
further negotiations with Granvelle, which left the question on the old 
footing (, 293, 296 seqq.^ 302 seq.). 

» Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 15, n. 7, 

• Ibid.^ n. 10. In further confirmation of this opinion, which 
emanated from Cervini himself, the latter wrote on Oct. 9 a special 
letter to the Pope {ibid.). 


On October the 14th Mafifei wrote to Farnese^ that his 
Holiness seemed disinclined to it. On the other hand, he 
wrote again on the 1 6th,' Paul III. for a time was against 
any alterations with regard to the Council, but that he 
approved of a suspension if it could be arranged without 
opposition and with the consent of the Imperialists. A 
letter of Maffei to Cervini of October the i6th^ also 
expressed fears lest the matter should be carried out 
contrary to the decision of a majority in the Council. 

On the 20th of October Maffei informed Farnese* that 
the Pope now intended, so as to avoid any cause of offence 
to the Emperor, to give no order himself for a translation 
or suspension of the Council but to leave the matter to 
the Council's own decision, as a measure whereby the 
continued attendance of the Imperialist prelates at the 
Synod would be secured ; then he intended to convene 
prelates of different countries in Rome for the purpose of 
drawing up a draft of reform. In the same sense 
Santafiora wrote to the Legates on the 20th of October.^ 
Three days later he gave them to understand ^ that they 
had better take steps towards suspension as quickly as 
possible, before the aspect of affairs underwent a change. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 288, n. i. 

2 Ibid. 

3 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 15, n. 11 ; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
xxxvi seq. 

* Nuntiattirberichte, IX., 300 seq. 

* Since the suspension "a beneplacito di Sua Santita," as at first 
desired by the Pope, he adds, although certainly approved by the 
majority, was yet sure to meet with considerable opposition, while a 
suspension for a fixed period, not less however than six months, 
would be agreed to unanimously, the Legates ought to have full 
discretion as to the steps to be taken (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 300 
seq., n. 5). 

" Cf. Nufttiaturberichte, IX., 309, n. i ; c/. ibid.^ xxxvii. 


The Legates in their reply of the 25th of October,* besides 
pointing out that the favourable opportunity which had 
offered at the beginning of the month was over, urged in 
particular how dangerous it would be if the powers of self- 
suspension were to be recognized in the Council when, like 
those of summons and dissolution, they resided in the 
Pope alone ; such a measure, moreover, could only be 
passed in a session, and for this they were not sufficiently 
prepared. They designed, however, to consider carefully 
several ways by which the Pope's intentions might be 
carried out. First of all they must play upon the 
Imperialists' fears of a translation in order to obtain their 
consent to a suspension as the lesser of two evils. 
Madruzzo undertook to apply this argument to Pacheco 
and Mendoza. Mendoza seemed even to be in agreement,^ 
and held out prospects of the Emperor's consent. 

The last accounts received, on the 28th of October, from 
Farnese before his return from Germany, through his 
secretary Antonio Elio,^ who had been sent on in advance, 
were not favourable to suspension.* According to these the 
Emperor in opposing the project adhered to the reasons 
he had already expressed, although he did not intend 
thereby to dispute in any way the right of the Pope to 
adopt such a measure even without his consent. For the 
rest he no longer intended to oppose the wishes of 
Paul III. in respect of the future action of the Council 
whether in matters of dogma or of reform. Charles V. 

^ Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 15, n. ii; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 309, 
rul', cf. ibid.^ xxxviii. 

'•' Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 15, n. 12; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
347, n. I. 

3 Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 582. 

* Farnese's instructions for Elio on making his report in the 
Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 609 seqq. 


set forth his standpoint with greater precision in his 
instructions to Don Juan Hurtado de Mendoza,^ who at 
the end of October had been sent as ambassador-extra- 
ordinary to Rome. Charles herein declared that it had 
never been his intention to hinder the proceedings of the 
Council in the deliberations on the article on justification ; 
what was of interest to him was that this subject should 
be examined and tested with the greatest thoroughness on 
account of its importance in relation to the Protestanta 
He therefore thought it also appropriate that fresh 
invitations from the Pope and the Legates should be sent 
to the German bishops requesting their attendance at the 
Council or at least, so far as they had legitimate excuses 
to offer, that of their theologians, especially those who had 
taken part in the religious conferences of time past and 
knew all the ins and outs of their opponents' machinations. 
He also thought that it might be well to submit the article 
on justification to the opinion of some of the universities, 
such as Paris or Louvain. 

Besides the affairs of the Council, Mendoza was to treat 
of delay in the payment of the subsidies promised by 
Paul HI. for the war against the Protestant Estates and the 
appointment of Verallo with plenipotentiary powers to 
execute the functions of Legate to the army, hitherto vested 
in Farnese. The Cardinal, who suffered severely from the 
unaccustomed climate of Germany, had already applied 
for recall, but out of consideration for the Emperor his 
request had been refused. Now at last, on the approach of 

* Oct. 18, 1540 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 612 seqq. ; cj. ibid., xxxiv 
seq.). The conciliar Legates, as they wrote to Santatiora on Nov. 10, 
had been informed by Diego de Mendoza of the mission of Juan de 
Mendoza and the nature of his commission concerning the Council {cJ, 
Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 15, n. 13; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 348, n. cj 
Merkle, I., 584, n. 1). 


the cold season, permission was granted to him, and on the 
25th of October 1546 he began his return journey to Italy. 
Two days previously he had his farewell audience. In this 
all the questions still at issue, especially the Council and the 
agreement with Francis I,, came under discussion, and 
finally an opportunity was given to treat of an incident 
which affected the conflict of interests on both sides in 
the Italian Peninsula. This was the dispute between 
Pier Luigi Farnese and the Count del Verme of Romagnese, 
whom the viceroy of Milan, Ferrante Gonzaga, protected.^ 
The supremacy of Spain bore heavily on Italy, For 
this reason Paul III. from the beginning of his pontificate 
felt that both as Pope and as an Italian ruler he was 
bound to oppose the establishment in Milan of the 
authority of a sovereign who was already master of Naples 
and Sicily. Naples and Milan under one ruler threatened 
not merely the remains of Italian autonomy but the 
independence of the Holy See. Paul III. would have 
liked best to have seen Milan in the hands of a Farnese, 
or at any rate of an Italian, but if this presented itself as 
an impossibility, then a French would have been more 
desirable than an Imperial prince, as in the former case 
at least an equilibrium of forces would have been restored 
in Italy. The peace of Crespy stipulated that either the 
Netherlands or Milan should be held by the Duke of 
Orleans, son of Francis I. After the Duke's death 
(September the 8th, 1545) had made this engagement void 
it was not to be expected that Francis would rest quiet 
without some compensation for his baffled prospects. The 
King, in fact, did hold Savoy for himself for a while, but 
in this question " the interests of France lay hidden by 
those of the Pope, to whom the establishment of Imperial 

1 See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 310,11. I ; cf. Venet. Depeschen, II., 

57, 60, 62-66. 


preponderance in Italy could not be less insupportable 
than it was to the King."^ 

The conflict of interests in Italy had become more acute 
when Charles V. in April 1546 appointed Ferrante 
Gonzaga as viceroy of Milan. Paul III. had hoped that 
Ottavio Farnese, the Emperor's son-in-law, would have 
received this important post. Instead of the latter there 
came to Milan in the person of Gonzaga a man who was 
a bitter adversary of the house of Farnese and one who 
at a former time had cast covetous eyes on Parma and 
Piacenza.2 Ferrante's brother, Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, 
did all he could to keep this enmity alive ;^ no wonder 
the conflict with Pier Luigi, whose recognition as Duke of 
Parma and Piacenza the Emperor stubbornly declined, 
was an endless one. In this contention the Imperial 
diplomacy interfered in favour of Gonzaga.* 

As Pier Luigi, to counteract the hostility of the 
Imperialists, attached himself to France, the situation 
grew even more strained. Ferrante urged Charles V. to 
put an end to the matter by expelling Pier Luigi from 
Parma and Piacenza. What under such circumstances 
would follow when Charles made himself completely 
master in Germany? The old dread felt by Paul III. 
grew more intense, kept alive as it was by the machinations 
of France. The Imperial supremacy was bound to react 
with the worst effects on the Farnese family, on the States 
of the Church, and on the Council. 

While the conflict between Papal and Imperial interests 

* Friedensburg'S opinion in Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xlii. 

2 See GosELLiNi, Vita de F. Gonzaga, 14, 18; Maurenbrecher, 
1 1 5 seq. 

^ Appendix No. 32 the *letter of Cardinal E. Gonzaga of 
Oct. 13, 1546 (Vatican Library). 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xlv, 316, 317. 

VOL. XII. ^1 


was reaching its sharpest point the position of the nuncio 
Verallo at the court of Charles was one of poignant distress. 
On the 1 2th of November 1546 the nuncio and Granvelle 
came into violent collision during an examination of their 
respective grievances. Granvelle complained of the lack 
of support given to his master by the Pope; he once 
more turned the discussion in an uncalled-for manner on 
the disclosure of the treaty of June to the Swiss. Verallo's 
attempts at an excuse were brushed aside by the Imperial 
minister, who demanded angrily that the Pope should 
show more zeal in his behaviour. On Verallo asking what 
then his Holiness was to do, Granvelle referred him to 
the mission of Mendoza. The nuncio replied that Paul III. 
would certainly do all that was possible, but reciprocity 
demanded that the Emperor on his side should make 
some advances to the Pope. "What advances? What 
advances?" cried Granvelle. "We would like to send him 
a whole army who should fire him a salvo and blow an 
alarm." In consequence of this scornful rebuff Verallo on 
his part also broke through his restraint and enumerated 
a series of points in which Charles V. had failed to show 
any compliance : the still unsettled incident of the pre- 
bend of Barletta, the encroachments on ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction in Naples and Spain, and other instances. 
Granvelle replied that general affairs and private ought 
not to be mixed, and said threateningly that if the Pope 
did not give more thorough and more substantial support 
it would be necessary to find out other ways of safeguard- 
ing the Imperial interests. When the nuncio then brought 
forward Pier Luigi's quarrel with the Count del Verme 
the two diplomatists fell into a renewed altercation. In 
the eagerness of their dispute they both sprang from their 
seats, a circumstance which Granvelle made use of to 
close the interview and bow the nuncio politely out. In 


the report which Verallo at once sent to Rome of this 
occurrence he drew the conclusion that Charles V. was 
bent on making his supremacy effective over the whole 
of Italy.i 

The impression made in Rome by these and other 
communications need not be described. It was tlie 
extreme of unwisdom on the Emperor's part to exasperate 
and wound the Pope's feelings at the very moment when 
he was asking for a prolongation of the treaty. Cardinal 
Farnese, who was once more in Rome on the loth of 
December, found the Pope still undecided but deeply hurt 
that even in such a small matter as that of the "spolia" of 
the bishopric of Badajoz the Emperor showed not the 
smallest desire to oblige him. Nor did the Pope feel less 
painfully Granvelle's behaviour over the quarrel between 
Pier Luigi and the Count del Verme. Verallo was 
instructed on the 13th of December to bring both matters 
once more before the Emperor. In this letter Farnese 
impressed on the nuncio the necessity of establishing a 
secure peace between Charles V. and Francis I. as that 
upon which everything else depended,^ 

For such a peace the Pope had been working ever since 
November with an earnestness ^ proportioned to the clear- 
ness with which he gauged the consequences of a breach 
between the two monarchs. In this case he was in conflict 
with France, as his alliance with the Emperor was still 
binding. It was therefore of great importance to him to 
induce the Emperor to withdraw from Piedmont as a 
concession to Francis I. By taking the part of the French 
King in this matter he put the latter under an obligation, 
a circumstance of double value while his relations with the 

* See Verallo's letter of Nov. 12, 1546, ibid.^ IX., 339 seqq, 
"' See Farnese's letter of Dec. 13, 1546,//^/^/., 387 seq. 
' Ibid., IX., xliii. 


Emperor were so strained. As an intermediary in the 
cause of peace the Modenese, Gurone Bertano, was on 
the 5th of January 1547 sent to Germany.^ 

In the meantime the question had become urgent 
whether the alliance concluded with the Emperor should 
be prolonged or not. It appears that Cardinal Farnese 
was in favour of a further guarantee of help, while the 
Pope from the first had leaned to a contrary opinion.^ 
He was principally influenced by his old fear of the 
Emperor's supremacy, but also by the little inclination 
displayed by the latter for a peace with France.^ There- 
fore, since the outbreak of another Franco-Imperial war 
seemed probable, Paul III. was confronted with the danger 
of being drawn into the strife with results in the sphere of 
politics and of ecclesiastical affairs which no man could 

At the time of Farnese's mission to Germany Paul III., 
fully realizing this danger, had instructed him to bring 
his influence to bear on Charles V. in favour of a final 
peace with Francis. He had been untiring in pointing 
out to the Imperialist as well as to the French repre- 
sentatives in Rome the necessity of such a peace, had 
ordered the nuncio to work in the same sense,* and finally, 
when all else had proved vain, had sent Bertano. Until 
this question was settled Paul III. could not make up his 
mind to prolong his alliance with the Emperor. There was 
the further consideration that after the news of the war in 
Germany, received in December, a turn in affairs had 

1 See PlEPER, Nuntiaturen, 130, 189 seg.; Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
412 seg. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 413, n. i. 

3 For the Emperor's motives, see Nuntiaturberichte, XI., xlii- 

* fh'd.f x!iii-xliv, 335, n. I. 


taken place which apparently made the Emperor much 
more independent than hitherto of assistance.^ The state 
of the Papal finances also threw weight into the scale. 
The despatch and upkeep of the Pope's contingent had 
cost 300,000 ducats.2 How was it possible for the Pope, 
who had to bear also the burden of the not inconsiderable 
expenses of the Council, to produce the immense sums 
demanded by a fresh war ? Finally, and this may well have 
been the master motive, the Pope was full of distrust of the 
intentions of Charles, who had addressed to Verallo the 
language of menace.^ What had been gained by the 
great sacrifices already made? The answer did not admit 
of doubt. Simply that the political power of the Emperor 
had been greatly strengthened, while in matters of religion, 
even after his successes in south Germany, a state of 
uncertainty prevailed. 

Apart from Cologne, where the removal of Hermann 
von Wied was rendered possible,* the Catholic cause at 
first derived very little advantage from the swing of the 
pendulum. The restoration •* of a few convents in Wurt- 

1 Together with Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xliv, 387, cf. also the 
^report of the Sienese envoy, A. Sansedoni, dat. Rome, Dec. 8 and 17, 
1546 (State Archives, Siena). See also H. Tiranno's ^report to the 
Duchess of Urbino of Dec. 11, 1546 (State Archives, Florence). 

2 See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., xxii. 

3 See in Appendix No. 33 the ^report of H. Tiranno of Dec. 1 1, 
1 546 (State Archives, Florence). 

* Hermann von Wied, already deposed by the Pope on April 16, 
1 546, had to resign on Jan. 26, 1 547, the administratorship of Paderborn, 
and on Feb. 25 the Archbishopric of Cologne (see Varrentrapp, 272 
seq.\ BuCH WeinSEERG, pubhshed by Hohlbaum, I., Leipzig, 1886, 
260 ; GULIK, Cropper, 1 17-120). 

* The Imperialists pointed to this and Pflug's establishment in 
Naumburg as well as to the removal of Hermann von Wied from 
Cologne (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 456, n. l). 


emberg meant very little in presence of the fact that the 
Imperial policy was much more bent on bringing the de- 
feated Protestants into civil subjection to the head of the 
Empire than into religious obedience to the Pope. On 
many grounds these tedious, cautious methods, which in 
their results indeed were not successful, seemed to be 
justified ; but in any case it was the Emperor's duty to 
have fulfilled his treaty obligations in matters of religion. 
By them he was expressly bound not to make any agree- 
ment with the Protestants on matters affecting the cause 
or object of the war without the consent of the Pope or his 
Legate, and especially to refuse concessions which would 
run counter to the interests of religion and the constitu- 
tion of the Catholic Church.^ 

The Imperial diplomatists had already infringed this 
stipulation by the engagements entered into at Ratisbon 
with Duke Maurice of Saxony and the Margrave Hans of 
Brandenburg-Ciistrin. While in the treaty with the Pope 
the origin of the war as alleged was the refusal to submit 
to the Council sitting at Trent, in the agreement with the 
Duke and the Margrave the authority of the Council was 
altogether disregarded.^ In those made with the Count 
Palatine Frederick and Duke Ulrich of Wurtemberg the 
question of religion was not even mentioned.^ Also in the 
treaties with the Estates of the Oberland the recognition 
of the Council was not made a condition, but only submis- 
sion to the decrees of the Diet and the jurisdiction of the 
Imperial Chancery. In religious affairs the Emperor still 

1 Cf. supra, p. 289. 

* Cf. JANSSEN- Pastor, III., i8th ed., 622 seq., 671. 

> Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 3 ; Stalin, Wirtemb. Geschichte, IV., 
460. With the ratification of the treaty of Cadan the continuance of 
Protestantism was secured (see Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte, IV., 
6th ed., 339). 


gave these Estates express security for the toleration of the 
"existing religion," on account of which they were not to 
be liable " to the sword or any other form of forcible 
authority."^ Accordingly the Protestant preachers were 
at liberty, even under the very eyes of the Emperor, to go 
about as before declaiming against " the Antichrist in 
Rome." 2 

All these treaties with the defeated Protestant Estates 
were concluded without the consent of the Pope or that 
of the Legate's successor, the nuncio Verallo, having been 
invited, as was expressly laid down in the compact of 
June 1546.^ That Charles was well aware of the viola- 
tion of treaty thus committed is clear from his anxious en- 
deavours to keep Verallo aloof from all negotiations. The 
nuncio only appeared upon the scene in order to hear the 
Emperor's complaints of the behaviour of the Papal troops 
and his threats against Paul III. if the latter should not 
consent to a prolongation of the treaty. It was a misfor- 
tune that here again Verallo was not equal to his task ; a 
stronger man would have insisted more forcibly on the 
observance of the treaty. 

If the whole of the previous behaviour of the Emperor 
had been of a kind to disgust Paul III. in the highest 
degree with the treaty, so must the disloyal agreement with 
the Protestant Estates, in the hour of their defeat, have 
revived the opinion in Rome that the Emperor was only 
making use of the Pope's assistance for the extension of 

* Cf. RanKE, IV., 6th ed., 336 seq. ; Keim, Reformation in Ulm, 
Stuttgart, 1851, 375 seq.; Egelhaaf, II., 476; Nuntiaturberichte, 
IX., 444, n. 2. 

2 Cf. Venet. Depeschen, II., 137. 

s Cf. Maffei's complaints in the letter of Jan. 23, 1547, in Balan, VI., 
282, as well as Farnese's letter of Feb. 5, 1547, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 

IX., 456. 


his own political power and that, heedless of the Papal 
interests, he was making a vital attack on the Church by 
illicit concessions to his adversaries in order to disarm 
their opposition. Under these circumstances, the Pope's 
determination to refuse the renewal of the treaty, which 
had expired in December, to suspend his subsidies and to 
withdraw his forces, is intelligible. 

Intelligible as this course of action by Paul III. might 
have been under existing circumstances, undisputed as his 
formal rights were, yet the question may be asked whether 
a Pope led only by ecclesiastical considerations would have 
taken a step which was of a kind to give the Protestants 
the greatest advantage.^ The quarrel between the Emperor 
and the Pope, moreover, never would have been of so violent 
a character if France had not continually fanned the flame. 
Paul III., in his dread of the Hapsburgs becoming masters 
of the world, was only too ready to listen to such insinua- 
tions, especially when Charles V. gave cause for just com- 
plaint. Both parties were to blame for the outbreak of 
fresh causes of dissension and the final dissolution of an 
alliance directed against the common enemy.^ 

The withdrawal of a benefaction is not seldom construed 
as an active offence. Paul III. was too well schooled in 
human nature not to know this ; therefore the briefs 
drawn up on the 22nd of January 1547, announcing the 
recall of the Papal auxiliary forces, were couched in the 
most temperate language. Charles was congratulated in 
the handsomest terms on a victory in which indeed the 
Pope himself also had been a participator, and the expecta- 
tion was expressed that his work in Germany would be 

» Ranke (Papste, I., 6th ed., 167) goes too far in saying that the 
Pope felt that he was then an ally of the Protestants. 

2 Hergenrother (Kirche und Staat, 220) thinks that not the 
smallest share of the blame lies on Charles V. 


crowned by a restoration of the Catholic reh'gion. With 
genuine diplomatic skill the most important point was 
introduced briefly at the close : " Since the war is as good as 
at an end, and your Majesty's position is wholly favourable 
and secure, we have determined to recall from Germany 
the troops sent to your aid and which now are terribly 
reduced in numbers, with the intention, in the case of such 
another occasion arising and your undertaking a similar 
war against the enemies of the Christian religion, of again 
springing to your side, as we have hitherto done, according 
to our own strength and that of the Apostolic See."^ 

To Cardinal Farnese, who still favoured an extension 
of the alliance, fell the disagreeable task of giving Verallo 
more precise instructions as to the manner in which he 
was to justify the contents of the brief on its delivery to 
the Emperor, The nuncio was to call attention to the 
Pope's deep regret that audience was so long refused to 
his representative and that the latter, contrary to treaty, 
had not been admitted to the negotiations with the 
Protestant Estates. In a drastic postscript written in his 
own hand Farnese gave lively expression to his keen 
annoyance at the turn affairs had taken. During his 
presence at the Imperial court a deaf ear had been turned 
to his expostulations that greater consideration should be 
shown to the Pope. Like Cassandra, he had foreseen 
everything that had come to pass.' 

1 See Ravnaldus,' 1547, n. 98; cf. also Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
422, n. I. 

2 Farnese's letter to Verallo, dat. Jan. 22, 1547 (Nuntiaturberichte, 
IX., 421 seq^. Concerning the refusal of an audience, Friedens- 
BURG says {ibid.^ xlvi), correctly, that this complaint was unfounded. 
But that there had not been also a previous infringement of the 
treaty, I cannot agree to. That such had taken place is assumed by 
DE Leva (IV., 184) and Ranke (Deutsch. Gesch., IV., 6th ed., 300). 


Farnese's prognostications of evil were surpassed by the 
reception given to Verallo in an audience at Ulm, on the 
2nd of February 1547, when he presented his instructions 
to the Emperor, then exasperated by the publication of 
the decree on justification at Trent and by the exhorta- 
tions of Bertano to come to a peace with France. 

As far as the recall of the Papal troops was concerned, 
Charles observed scornfully, he was thankful to be quit of 
a pack of Italian robbers who had done nothing but harm ; 
only, the reasons adduced for the withdrawal were puerile 
and untrue. For the congratulations offered by his 
Holiness he kissed his feet, but did not believe in their 
sincerity ; on the contrary, he had become more and more 
convinced that the Pope had entangled him in this war 
with the intention of destroying him. In order to give 
a hint that he saw through the cause of such conduct the 
Emperor, whose temper had been steadily rising, recalled' 
a well-known Italian proverb to the effect that it was 
excusable in young men to contract the French sickness 
but not in the old. Although the nuncio tried to give 
another turn to the discussion, the Emperor applied the 
proverb, so insulting in its double meaning to the Pope, 
a little further by remarking that this was no new 
complaint with Paul III., as he had already suffered from 
it in his youth. Throwing off figures of speech, the 
Emperor said plainly that the Pope was getting out of 
his alliance on the inducement of France. He was certain 
that Paul III.'s one object in drawing him into war was to 
ruin him ; but God had ordained otherwise, and he hoped, 
even without the Pope's help, to bring his undertaking to 
a victorious end. Charles accounted for his refusal to give 
an audience by his many preoccupations, his gout, and the 
conviction that Verallo only wished to ply him with 
empty speeches. 


To the complaint that he had made agreements with 
the Protestant Estates without consulting the Pope, Charles 
replied in anger that he had acted with wise precaution, 
since the name of Paul III. was so hated in Germany and 
many other Christian countries on account of his evil deeds 
that its introduction would only have wrought harm. The 
Emperor then returned once more to his standing grievance 
of the disclosure of the treaty to the Swiss, whereby Paul III. 
sought intentionally to embroil him with the Protestants. 
He was conscious of having performed his own duty as 
a Christian prince better than the Pope had done his, and 
he hoped that the day would yet come when he should be 
able to tell the Pontiff so to his face. He cherished the 
certain expectation of bringing the war, from which Paul III. 
retired, to such a finish that he might perhaps prove a 
cause of inconvenience to a third party. A rejoinder from 
the nuncio he cut short by leaving the room upon the 
pretext that it was time for him to go to Mass. The 
Emperor had spoken so loud in his passion that those 
waiting in the antechamber understood his expressions of 
wrath at the Pope for being on so good a footing with 
the French.^ 

Even Granvelle, who in other respects was sorry for the 
violent behaviour towards Verallo, imputed Paul III.'s 
conduct chiefly to French influence.^ The nuncio there- 
fore tried in a second audience which he had together with 
Bertano to defend his master against all these accusations, 
by adducing the reasons which had been conclusive against 
a renewal of the treaty. While this parleying on these and 
other debatable points was going on, Verallo perceived in 

^ For Verallo's audience we have, as well as his report (Nuntiatur- 
berichte, IX., 444 seq.), that of Charles V. to Mendoza (MaurEN- 
BRECHER, 90* seq.) ; cf. also Venet. Depeschen, II., 163. 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 448. 


the Emperor a more approachable frame of mind. Never- 
theless, Charles could not refrain from saying that if France 
began to make war upon him and the Pope left him in 
the lurch he would come to terms with the Protestants. 
In the same audience Charles declared openly that the 
revolt of Genoa under Fiesco against the Imperialist Doria, 
hatched with the help of France, had taken place in 
understanding with the Pope. This Verallo emphatically 
challenged. At the close of the audience Charles stated 
that in future his bearing towards the Pope would depend 
upon the behaviour of the latter towards him.^ 

The outburst of anger, in which the Emperor had attacked 
the Pope personally and asserted, in direct contradiction 
to facts, that the latter had enticed him into war,^ was not 
by any means a momentary fit of passion but had a calcu- 
lated purpose. The threats, mingled with violent com- 
plaints, were intended to intimidate his former ally and 
force him to further compliance, especially in relation to 

The claims of Charles in this respect, now of long 
standing, led to nothing less than a vast scheme of secu- 
larization. All the churches and convents throughout his 
empire and states were to surrender a half of the movable 
property in gold and silver and a half of their yearly 
income from the funds for the support of edifices. Even 
in Madrid such a requisition was regarded with dismay.^ 

1 For this audience also we have the reports of Verallo (Nuntiatur- 
berichte, IX., 462 seq.) and of Charles V. (Maurenbrecher, 94* 
seq. ; cf. Mavnier, 455 seq.). 

2 That the Emperor himself determined on the Schmalkaldic war 
is incontrovertible (see supra, p. 223 seqq.) ; see also FriedensbURG 
in Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxix ; cf. Riezler, 339. 

3 See Maurenbrecher, 47* seqq., 123 ; cf. Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 


The proposal, moreover, was made in a way most likely to 
offend Paul 1 1 1. The haughty behaviour of the Imperialists 
in Rome betrayed clearly their intention of treating the 
Pope with insolence.^ Paul III., however, did not lose his 
presence of mind; ^ he replied firmly that so immoderate a 
demand, the result of which was beyond conjecture, could not 
be acceded to ; a specified amount somewhat over 4CX),ooo 
ducats would admit of discussion. The Imperialists, how- 
ever, would hear nothing of this, taunted the Pope with his 
partiality towards France, and declared plainly that in case 
of necessity they would proceed without the Pope's permis- 
sion with their plan of secularization, which had received 
the sanction of their theologians. In audience on the 27th 
of February 1547 they even went so far as to threaten the 
Pope's person. Paul III., however, was no Clement VII. 
With much dignity he told them that an old man, whose 
days in any case could not be long extended, was not one 
to be frightened by such threats as these, and if he had to 
die a martyr for the honour of God, this for him would 
only be glorious — death indeed would bring him freedom 
from the care and toil which accompanied his position in 
such an age and among such princes.^ 

That Charles V. was determined to go to extremes 
Paul III. must have understood from the unprecedented 
language which he had indulged in to the nuncio Verallo. 
The French policy in the meantime aimed unremittingly 
at widening the breach between the Pope and Emperor and 
producing an incurable antagonism. Cardinal du Bellay 
drew the nuncio Dandino's attention to the Emperor's 
toleration of the Protestant confessions in the Estates 

1 Thus FriedenSBURG in Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 11. 

2 Cf. Ruggieri's report of Feb. 16, 1547, in Balan, VI., 382. 

3 See the contemporary reports in the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 494. 
n. 4 ; f/; ibid., li. 


which had made their submission, and asked the question 
if that were not a betrayal of the Holy See.^ 

The Emperor's behaviour was, in fact, favourable to such 
insinuations. Although southern Germany was tranquil- 
lized, the state of religion remained just as it was ; indeed 
it seemed as if the Emperor had abandoned the war against 
the leaders of the Schmalkaldic League, now retired into 
northern Germany, and was once more directing his atten- 
tion to Italy. While the Count Egmont of Biiren was 
ordered to discharge a portion of the troops, new Spanish 
levies were recruited for purposes upon which Ferrante 
Gonzaga was called in to deliberate. He was of opinion 
that they should be sent to Siena in order to hold in 
check 2 the Pope and the Farnesi, who for a long time had 
had their eyes fixed on that city. Together with this 
went Ferrante's design, which was becoming more and 
more pronounced, of wresting Parma and Piacenza from 
the Papal family.^ 

In view of this situation it was not surprising * if Paul 1 1 1., 
sorely menaced in the political as well as the ecclesiastical 
sphere by the domination of the victorious Hapsburg, should 
have seen not in the Protestants but in the Emperor the 
more dangerous enemy of the two, and would have been not 
altogether displeased if the Schmalkaldic forces in northern 
Germany had held their own against the Imperial army.^ 

* See Druffel, Sfondrato, 310. 
2 /did., 310, 311. 

* See in/ra, p. 369 se^g. 

* Thus Druffel (Sfondrato, 311). 

* In an undated letter of Du Mortier to the French King it says : 
S. S. a eu nouvelles de la defaite du marquis de Brandenbourg par 
I'industrie de la scEur du Landgrave et entendu que le due de Saxe se 
trouve fort, dont elle a tel contentement comme celuy qui estime le 
commun ennemy estre par ces moyens retenu d'ex6cuter ses entre- 
prises et connoist-on bien qu'il serait utile sous main entretenir ceux 


The danger appeared all the greater to Paul III. since he 
could not count with certainty either on France or Venice. 
Under these circumstances he hit upon a strange plan 
whereby he hoped to evade giving his consent to the 
Emperor's ever more urgent demands for the great scheme 
of secularization : special Cardinal-Legates, Sfondrato and 
Capodiferro, were to invite Chaj-les V. and Francis I. to 
avail themselves of the opportunity offered by the death 
of Henry VIII. (27th-28th January 1547) to undertake 
the recovery of England to the Catholic Church.^ 

When Verallo on the nth of March 1547 communicated 
this project to the Emperor in Nordlingen, the latter 
grasped the opportunity of onc€ more giving expression to 
his anger at the Pope's conduct. To please the Pope, who 
had treated him so shabbily in the present war, he cried 
out, he would not go to war against the commonest 
rapscallion, let alone the nation of England. As for the 
plan of secularization, he only refrained from carrying it 
into execution because he estimated the result at a low 
figure. Yet even Ferdinand the Catholic, who was much 
more of a Catholic than Paul III., had carried out such a 
scheme. For the future he would reserve his reverence 
only for St. Peter, but not for the Pontiff Paul. The war 
against the Protestants, which was in nowise yet settled, 
would be renewed immediately, and he hoped, even were it 
unpleasant for the Pope, to bring it to a good end. Since 
Paul III. refused him any other support, let them put the 
nuncio and the Legates in the forefront of the battle, so as 

qui luy resistant, disant que vous ne scauriez faire depense plus utile 
(RiBlER, I., 637). This letter is so evidently written with a dinect 
purpose that it can hardly be relied upon without sotne further proof 
of credibility. 

1 Cf. Maynier, 456; Druffel, loc. cit., 312 seqq.', Pieper, 130 
seq.; FriedensburG in Nuntiaturberichte, IX., lii, 493,494 5 X.,xxiii. 


to set a good example to the rest, and let men see what 
they can do with their exorcisms and blessings.^ 

When things had gone thus far on the same nth of 
March on which Verallo had had to submit to such out- 
pourings of scorn and jeers on himself and the Pope, an 
event occurred by which the opposition between Pope and 
Emperor was sharply accentuated. This was the transla- 
tion of the Council from Trent to Bologna. This most 
important measure came unexpectedly, as the Synod 
during the winter of 1546-7 had displayed much productive 

* For Verallo's audience at Nordlingen, see besides his letter of 
March 11, 1547 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 511), the communications 
of Charles V. to Mendoza in Maurenbrecher, 102* seqq.^ and 
Maynier, 457 seq. ; cf. also Venet. Depeschen, II., 191, n. 2, 195 seq.^ 


Progress of the Council of Trent. — Its Removal to 
Bologna. — The Schmalkaldic War ends in Victory for 
THE Emperor. — Assassination of Pier Luigi Farnese. 

When Cardinal Farnese returned to Trent from his 
German legation on the 14th of November 1546, he there 
set to work to bring about an agreement between the 
opposed Papal and Imperialist interests in the Council, 
He succeeded, in fact, not merely in winning Cardinal 
Madruzzo but also Mendoza, the ambassador of Charles V., 
to agree to a suspension.^ By this via media the transla- 
tion might be avoided. After long and repeated conversa- 
tions an agreement was reached on the following points : 
first, the postponement of the decree on justification ; 
secondly, as it would not be fitting that a reform decree 
should be published by the Council without a dogmatic 
decree, but, on the other hand also, the reproach must be 
avoided that the Council wished to do nothing, the Pope 
must be asked to issue a Bull on the question of reform, 
to be afterwards read aloud and approved at the Council ; 
thirdly, that the Council, on account of the Emperor's 
objection to a translation and of the dangerof a suspension 
for an indefinite period, should be suspended at first for six 
months only. To this agreement the consent of the Pope 
and of the Emperor was to be invited. On the assump- 

1 Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 385 seq. See alsg 
Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 16, and Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 346 seq. 
VOL. XII. 337 -2 


tion that the Emperor's consent was certain Farnese 
requested the Pope, in communicating the terms of the 
arrangement, to declare his consent also, and to intimate 
the same to the Legates.^ 

The Legates in their report to Santafiora of the 17th of 
November 2 remarked that since Mendoza had anticipated 
the Emperor's consent they also had done so in the case of 
the Pope without saying anything of the powers committed 
to them to accept this measure. They intended in the 
meantime to work energetically for the formulation of 
the decree on justification, and advised that the Pope 
should, if the Emperor did not consent to a suspension, 
make known his will concerning the immediate publica- 
tion of the decree, so that the Council might proceed on 
its course and soon be ended. The Legates expressed 
stronger doubts of the possibility of carrying through a 
suspension in their next letter to Santafiora of the 19th 
of November.^ Here they insisted that the favourable 
opportunity had already gone by, and doubted that the 
Emperor would confirm the agreement come to with his 
ambassador; in any case, they asked for the speedy trans- 
mission of regulations for the continuance of the work of 
the Council. 

The Pope would have preferred, wrote Santafiora on 
the 23rd of November to Farnese,* on receipt of his report 
from Trent, and to the Legates on the 29th of November,^ 
that the suspension had taken place at once after the 
arrangement had been come to with Mendoza without 

* Letters of Nov. 16 and 17, 1546, ibid.^ 346 seq.\ Pallavicini, 
loc. cit. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 351-353. 

3 Ibid., IX., 353-355- 

* Ibid., 361 seq. 
Ibid.., 362, n. 1. 


waiting any longer for a message from the Emperor. It 
this should come in the sense hoped for, then the Pope, 
according to the letter of the 29th, would like the suspen- 
sion to take place, not as proceeding from him ; he would 
much rather in this case send the Legates a brief command- 
ing them to procure the suspension by means of the vote of 
a majority. This promised brief was sent by Farnese to 
the Legates on the 13th of December.^ 

The Emperor's answer was long delayed, and when it 
came contained a refusal. After Mendoza and Toledo in 
the meantime had left Trent, there appeared on the morning 
of the 20th, as representatives of the Imperial interests, 
Cardinals Madruzzo and Pacheco, with the Emperor's 
decision, which they made known to the Legates.^ Ac- 
cording to this Charles V. desired, out of consideration for 
German affairs, the postponement of the publication of the 
decree on justification and a further examination of the 
same. With regard to the duty of episcopal residence, 
he was in favour of the mode agreed to, namely, that the 
Pope should issue a Bull on the subject, but begged that 
the special interests of the Spanish bishops should be 
considered. The suspension of the Council he rejected 
entirely on the ground that now, after the success of his 
campaign, he hoped that Germany would submit to the 
decisions of the Council ; but of that there could be no 
talk unless the Council remained in session, as otherwise 
its reputation was gone. Thereupon the Legates at once 
informed the Emperor's representatives that if under these 
circumstances the suspension was to be dropped, there was 
then no necessity to comply with the Emperor on the 

* Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 390. 

* Cf. the report of the Legates to Farnese of Dec. 20, 1546, ibid., 
398-403 ; ibid., 401 seq., n., a letter of Cervini's to Maffei of Dec, 20. 
Cf. also Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 16, n. 11, 12. 


other points. If the Council was to remain in session the 
decree on justification must be published, and afterwards 
the remainder of the work quickly settled. They would 
therefore now, without delay, propose to the Fathers the 
discussion of the question of episcopal residence and the 
fixture of a terminal date for the sitting. This they did 
notwithstanding the objections of the two Cardinals in the 
general congregation ^ held on the afternoon of the same 
day ; the voting was to take place on the following day. 
This was on December the 2gth.^ In accordance with the 
Legates' proposal the sitting was fixed for the 13th of 
January by a majority of more than two-thirds as against 
the sixteen votes of the Imperialists, led by Pacheco. The 
date was well chosen, for the decree on justification was 
ripe for judgment. On the following day the discussion 
on episcopal residence began. 

In accordance with the vote taken the sixth solemn 
session was held on the 13th of January 1547.^ It was 
one of the most important of the whole Council, since in it 
the publication of the decree on justification took place. 
The Fathers of the Council had devoted all the more 
diligence and enthusiasm to this subject as it was in itself 
one of the most difficult questions of theology, and one in 
which, as Bishop de' Nobili said at the very beginning, the 
axe must be laid at the root of the Lutheran errors.* From 

* Cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I,, 109 seg'.; Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
III., ed. Merkle, I., 454, 594. The Legates' letter to Farnese of Dec. 
20 in the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 401 se^, 

' C/". Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., in seg'. -, Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
III., ed. Merkle, I., 454, 496. The Legates to Farnese, dat. Dec. 29, 
1546 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 403, n, 2); Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 17, 
n. I. 

' Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 121 seg'. ; Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., 
ed. Merkle, I., 458, 601-603 ; Pallavicini, 1. 8, c. 18, n. 10-13. 

* See Ehses in Rom. Quartalschr., XIX., 181 


the 22nd to the 28th of June 1546 the questions, often most 
difficult, appertaining to this subject were discussed first 
of all by the theologians and then from the 30th of June by 
the bishops. The debates were very animated. At the 
close of the general congregation of July the 17th, as the 
Fathers were taking their departure, a deplorable scene 
took place between two hot-blooded southerners when the 
Greek Bishop of Crete, Zanettini, roused Sanfelice, Bishop 
of La Cava, to such a frenzy of anger that the latter 
seized his opponent by the beard and plucked out the 

The draft of a decree on justification, which had been 
entrusted to four bishops on the 15th of July, encountered 
strong opposition.^ Consequently, Cardinal Cervini held a 
conference with a number of prominent theologians and 
committed to them the task of drawing up a fresh scheme. 
Among them was Girolamo Seripando, the learned General 
of the Augustinian Hermits. On the nth of August he 
presented a first draft, afterwards revised at Cardinal 
Cervini's request, which formed the basis of the discussions 
conducted by Cervini together with the presiding Legate, 
del Monte, and many bishops and theologians.^ 

New propositions thus arose which were distributed on 

* Cf. Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., ed. Merkle, I., 444, 561. 

2 For the following, cf. Ehses, Joh. Croppers Rechtfertigungslehre 
aufdem Konzil von Trient, in the Rom. Quartalschr., XX., 178 seq.., 
where Seripando's *memoranda in Cod. VII., D 12, of the National 
Library, Naples, are used for the first time. See J. HEFNER, Die 
Entstehungsgeschichte des Trienter Rechtfertigungsdekretes, Pader- 
born, 1909. Cf. further, Ehses, Der Anteil des Augustinersgenerals 
Seripandi an dem Trienter Dekret iiber die Rechtfertigungslehre, in 
the Rom. Quartalschr., XXIII. (1909), 3 j^y^. The whole collection 
of documents will shortly be published by Ehses in his 5th vol. of the 
Cone. Trid. 

' Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 569 ; Ehses, 179. 


September the 23rd among the members of the general 
congregation. They differed to such an extent both in 
form and matter from those of Seripando that he could 
hardly recognize his original handiwork. On the 27th, 
28th, and 29th of September the theologians discussed 
Cervini's proposals, and on the ist of October the prelates 
made them the subject of a special debate which was 
sustained throughout with the greatest thoroughness,^ It 
was in the course of these proceedings that Seripando on 
the 8th of October introduced the theory of a twofold 
justice, an inherent and an imputed — a theory already 
supported by certain learned and distinguished theologians 
in Italy and Germany. It was not his wish, however, he 
remarked, to affirm or deny in this question, but only to 
invoke the decision of the Council ; if it were found that 
the doctrinal opinion of a twofold justice was erroneous, 
let it be rejected unconditionally ; but if the contrary were 
shown to be the case, let not truth be condemned along 
with error ; the great names of Contarini, Cajetan, Pighius, 
Pflug, and Gropper, on the Catholic side, ought not to be 
included in the disavowal of Luther, Bucer, and Calvin. 
It must have made a great impression when Seripando 
dwelt upon the necessity of submitting the apparently 
heterodox opinions of men who had been, and still in part 
were, the champions of the Church to such a full examina- 
tion that no one could bring forward the charge that 
the Council had passed sentence against them without 
thoughtful consideration.^ 

Seripando's action gave rise to deliberations of the most 
thoroughgoing character not only on the doctrine of an 

> Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 575 seq.\ Ehses, 
179 seq. 

• See Theiner, Acta, I., 234, and Ehses, 180 seq.^ who justly 
insists on Seripando's great services throughout the negotiations. 


imputed justice, but also on the difficult question of the 
assurance of salvation on the part of the justified. The 
debates lasted from the 15th to the 26th of October, 
through no less than ten conferences of theologians, almost 
all of whom submitted their opinions in writing at great 
length.* Upholders of the most different opinions, pro- 
fessors of the Sorbonne and Salamanca and members of 
the old orders, vied with one another in giving lucidity to 
a question upon which even the most devoted Catholics 
were widely at variance. Among the new orders the 
Jesuits were represented by men of such conspicuous 
learning as Salmeron and Laynez; both had come as 
theologians of the Pope, and as such enjoyed a certain 
precedence, but the importance of their position was due 
primarily to their deep erudition and brilliant powers of 
exposition. This was particularly the case with Laynez, 
whose opinion given at the final sitting was one of the 
most influential.^ 

As the result of the conference of theologians the 
doctrine of imputed justice was rejected by thirty-two votes 
to five, to Seripando's bitter disappointment. Still more 
unfortunate was the well-intentioned but unsuccessful 
theory of compromise produced at the special debate of 
the episcopate, which lasted from the 9th of November to 
the 1st of December. This proposal was rejected by all 
the Fathers, led by the unerring conviction that inherent 
righteousness through God's mercy contains already every- 
thing necessary to salvation, and that the acceptance of 
an imputed justice is quite unnecessary in order to venerate 
in the justifying and redeeming grace of Christ the basis 
and root of the justification of man. Even Seripando, who 

1 Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 580; Theiner, Acta, 
I., 239 ; EhSES, loc. cit.f 182 seq. 
* Best copy in Grisar, J. Lainez, Disput. Trid., II., 153 seg. 


Still defended his favourite thesis with talent and composure, 
could not resist the force of this argument. He practically 
surrendered his position by clothing his opinion in words 
which did little more than express what was common to 
both opinions.^ 

In the general congregation of the 17th of December 
1546 Cardinal del Monte once more drew the attention of 
the Fathers to a second central question : the assurance 
of salvation in the justified. Del Monte wished this topic, 
which must have caused further delay in the publication of 
the long-debated decree on justification, to be passed over 
as not strictly belonging to the subject. Cardinal Pacheco 
opposed him strongly. Both Cardinals had numerous 
followers, so that it was for long doubtful which opinion 
would carry the day. In the end del Monte was victorious ; 
the article on final assurance was dropped, the Council 
having to restrict its decisions to publicly pronounced 
errors only.^ 

After repeated drafts, redrafts, and alterations, after 
thorough and impartial discussion, the decree on justifica- 
tion, composed with scrupulous care, was at last published 
on the 13th of January 1547. It contains sixteen chap- 
ters and three-and-thirty canons and is a masterpiece of 
theology, formulating with clearness and precision the 
standard of Catholic truth as distinguished from Pelagian 
error on the one hand and Protestant on the other.' 

* Ehses, loc. cit.^ 187 seq. 

* Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 109. 

8 With Hergenrother's opinion (Kirchengesch., II., i, 405), cf. 
that of Harnack (Dogmengesch., III., 605), who speaks of the decree 
" as in many respects admirably worked out," and even goes so far as 
to assert that " it may be doubted whether the Reformation would have 
developed as it did if this decree, for example, had been promulgated 
at the Lutheran council and had actually become incorporated into 
the doctrinal system of the Church." For Ranke's total misconcep- 


Starting from the axiom that neither the heathen by 
their natural powers nor the Jews by the Mosaic law are 
capable of participation, i.e. of reaching a state of grace and 
of adoption as children of God, the decree first of all 
insists that Christ alone is the salvation of the world 
through the communication of the merits of His sufferings, 
and that only for those who believe in Him and have been 
born again in Him by baptism. In adults justification has 
its beginning in the calling of God through prevenient 
grace without any supernatural merit on the part of man. 
The latter can resist grace or co-operate with it. In both 
cases there is the exercise of free will, but the co-operation 
is also conditioned by grace. 

With justification man receives not merely the forgive- 
ness of sins but is also inwardly sanctified. This renewal 
also is not merely imputed as something adhering to the 
man from without but is a deep inward process funda- 
mentally transforming the soul. 

Faith, however, is not alone sufficient for justification, 
it must be accompanied by hope and love, and, as the 
Scripture says, faith certainly must work by love, since 
faith without works is dead. Faith working by love in 
a constant state of grace through the following of the 
commandments of God and the Church results in a 
continual advance from virtue to virtue. 

In opposition to the Protestant assertion of an absolute 
assurance of salvation it was laid down as Catholic 
doctrine that no one in this life can fathom the secret 
of his predestination by God and, apart from a special 
revelation, know of a certainty that he is of the number 
of the elect. 

tion of the decree (Papste, I., 6th ed., 134), see Histor.-polit. Bl., 
XXXII., 399, n. For the sense of the 22nd Canon, see Straub in 
the Zeitschr. fiir kath. Theol., XXI., 107 seqq.., 208 seqq. 


While the decree on justification was unanimously 
accepted in the session of January the 13th, 1547, the reform 
decree on episcopal residence met with manifold opposition 
on points of detail. Consequently, the Legates proposed to 
consider the objections in a general congregation and 
decide upon them. The 3rd of March was fixed for the 
next session, and the Fathers were prohibited from leaving 
Trent before that date. With this the momentous sixth 
session closed, at which the Archbishop of Spalato, Andrea 
Cornaro, had sung the High Mass, and the Bishop of Salpe, 
Tommaso Stella, preached. There were also present the 
two Legates, Cardinals Madruzzo and Pacheco, ten arch- 
bishops, forty-seven bishops, two procurators, five generals 
of orders, and two abbots. The Imperial ambassadors were 
absent, and the French kept themselves aloof. 

With the publication of the decree on justification, 
produced under difficult circumstances and after long and 
serious labour, the Council, in its sixth session, reached 
the high-water mark of its endeavours.^ Among the 
members there was general satisfaction over the announce- 
ment of this important decision. There was reason to 
believe that the Council might now proceed quickly to 
a finish, since with the publication of the decree the most 
important dogmatic decision had been reached, and nothing 
now remained to be done but to apply to the doctrine of 
the Sacraments the conclusions drawn from the premises 
thus established.^ 

The Cardinal-Legate Cervini derived such confidence 
from the success thus happily achieved that he no longer 
feared the renewed threats of a German national council 
and wrote to Rome that these declarations were to be 

» Cf. Knopfler in Wetzer und VVelte, Kirchenlex., XI., 2nd ed., 


2 Ibid.^ 2066. 


received with perfect composure and answered by the offer 
of a Legatine mission to Germany.^ The Pope also showed 
great satisfaction at the results of the sixth session.^ In 
the answer to his instructions ^ which Mendoza received 
before his departure from Rome on the 30th of January, 
the following rejoinder was made* to the Imperial policy : 
As the contumacy of the Protestants had gone so far that 
Charles V. himself had found it necessary to take up arms 
against them, it also seemed to the Pope superfluous to 
interrupt the Council on their account, especially as the 
success of the Imperial forces offered a possibility of re- 
calling their opponents to obedience to the Holy See. The 
dogmatic decrees of the Council, which in the meantime 
had been passed, would only be a support and not a 
hindrance to such a movement. Nevertheless, the Pope, 
in accordance with the understanding come to with Diego 
de Mendoza during Farnese's sojourn in Trent, had been 
willing to meet the Emperor's wishes in regard to the 
postponement of the dogmatic decisions by means of a 
suspension ; but as Charles had not consented to this, it 
had been necessary to let the Council pursue its course, if 
it were not to dissolve automatically, which undoubtedly 
would be the case if the Fathers had been obliged to 
remain inactive in Trent. As to the Emperor's request 
that the article on justification should be thoroughly 
examined before publication, enough had undoubtedly been 
done, since the Council had been occupied with it for six 
whole months. The proposal that the decree should be 

* Cervini to Maffei, dat. Jan. 26, 1547 (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 424, 
n. I). 

2 Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. I, n. 2. 
' See supra, p. 319. 

* Cf. Farnese's letter to Verallo of Feb. 5, 1547 (Nuntiaturberichte, 
IX., 453-455 ; cf. ibid., xmhx seq) ; Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 3, n. 4 


submitted to the Universities before publication, as wished 
for by Charles V., would not only be superfluous, seeing 
that the opinion of these bodies was already known, but 
in opposition to the authority of the Council. 

The labours of the Council preparatory to the seventh 
session were now carried on without interference from with- 
out.* In the general congregation of the 15th of January, del 
Monte proposed to the Fathers as the subject of discussion 
for the seventh session the dogmas of the doctrine of the 
Sacraments, while in relation to reform further debate would 
be held on the duty of episcopal residence and the abuses 
and obstacles connected with it. On the 17th of January 
Cervini distributed among them a summary of the points 
to be considered under the dogmatic decree, namely, fourteen 
errors concerning the Sacraments in general, seventeen 
concerning baptism, and four concerning confirmation. 
They were first to be treated by the theologians ; after 
preliminary examination by the latter and division into 
three classes they were, on the 7th of February, again 
referred to the Fathers and then came before the general 
congregation for discussion from the 8th to the 21st of 

As the doctrine of the Sacraments had been the sub- 
ject of very detailed disquisition by Peter Lombard, 
St. Thomas Aquinas, and their commentators, it did not 
appear necessary, as with the decree on justification, to set 
forth the Catholic doctrine in detail and connectedly ; the 
decree was rather to consist of canons in which the various 
errors should be condemned. It was the wish of some of 
the Fathers that the condemnation should include the 
authors of the false teaching by n^me, but this was dis- 

* Cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 123-136; Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
III., ibid., 458-465, 603-621 ; PaLLAVICINI, 1. 9, c. I-u ; KnopFLER, 
loc. cit , 2066-2069. 


allowed. Here also, especially in the general debate on 
the sacrament of the altar, which was taken beforehand, 
the closest examination was made of all theological 
questions without curtailment or hurry. The final decree, 
which passed on the 1st and 2nd of March, after many 
alterations in the original draft, consisted of a preface, 
thirteen canons on the Sacraments in general, fourteen on 
baptism, and three on confirmation. 

For the preparation of the questions on reform a deputa- 
tion of canonists consisting of Fathers of the Council was 
formed on the 20th of January. They sat, under the 
presidency of del Monte, from the following day until the 
29th of January, when their transactions were transferred 
to the general congregation from the 31st of January to 
the 7th of February. These dealt, in part, retrospectively 
with the votes already given on the reform decree in the 
sixth session, and how they were to be regarded in con- 
junction with the various separate votes recorded on that 
occasion. During these first discussions the question was 
left open whether the previous decree should be taken as 
published or be submitted again for a final revision. It 
was not until the general congregation of the 24th of 
February, when the question of reform was resumed, that 
the Legates brought forward this point for settlement. On 
the following day it was resolved that the decree, as read 
at the sixth session, should be taken as accepted and 
approved by the majority in that assembly.^ 

The new reform decree for the seventh session, consisting 
of fifteen chapters, was finally settled on the 26th and 28th 
of February. It dealt with the qualifications of nominees 
to bishoprics, the visitation of sees, the maintenance and 
repair of churches, the powers of the Cathedral Chapter 

* Cf. Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 132-135 ; Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
III., ibid., 464, 617-619. 


during the vacancy of a see, the conferring of orders, the 
approbation of the presentee, the care of hospitals, and 
the legal position of ecclesiastics; the combination of 
bishoprics and benefices in one person was made matter of 
special prohibition. The express nomination of Cardinals, 
wished for by many, was prevented from becoming subject 
of discussion by the Legates, on receipt of instructions 
from Rome, as the reform of the Sacred College was a 
matter belonging exclusively to the Pope ; the same 
restriction applied to the question whether the duty of 
episcopal residence was of Divine law. As a matter of 
fact Paul III., in a consistorial decree published the i8th 
of February 1547, issued orders prohibiting Cardinals from 
holding more than one bishopric, and enjoining on them 
the duty of residence. Del Monte communicated this to 
the Fathers on the 25th of February and the 2nd of 

The seventh solemn session held on the 3rd of March 
15472 published the two decrees previously prepared. 
That on reform again called forth numerous objections 
from some of the Fathers. The celebrant was the Arch- 
bishop Jacopo Cauco of Corfu ; the sermon was omitted, as 
the preacher, Bishop Martirano of S. Marco, was disabled, 
owing to hoarseness. Those present were the Legates 
and Cardinal Pacheco, nine archbishops, fifty-two bishops,^ 
two abbots, and five generals of orders. The next 
session was fixed for the 21st of April. 

* Cf. our remarks. Vol. XI. of this work, p 510; Severoli, ed, 
Merkle, I., 135 ; Massarelli, Diarium, III., ibid., 619 seq. The 
decree in Merkle, I., 621, n. 

2 Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 136 seq.\ Massarelli, Diarium, II., III., 
ed. Merkle, I., 465, 621 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 12. 

^ List in Massarelli, Diarium, III., ed. Merkle, I., 622. For the 
number, ibid., n. i. 


After such a successful beginning it was not to be fore- 
seen that the work of the Council, instead of being carried 
quickly forward to a fortunate end, would before long 
undergo an interruption of more than a year's duration. 
For some time complaints of the unhealthiness of Trent 
had been made by not a few of the Fathers. They were 
redoubled when, about the date of the seventh session, an 
infectious and in many cases fatal malady, the spotted 
fever {mal di petecchie), entered the city. It was said that, 
owing to the epidemic, external communication with Trent 
would be cut off. The fears thus aroused among the 
Fathers afforded an opportunity for removing the Council 
which the Legates on this occasion could not overlook. 
If the intolerable pressure which the Emperor, with his 
claims against the Council, brought to bear upon the 
Legates and Fathers, is taken into consideration, it is not 
difficult to understand that they made use of an oppor- 
tunity, the weight of which is open to dispute, to restore 
independence to the Synod by withdrawal to a city re- 
moved from the reach of the dominating influence of 
Charles V.' 

The Legates certainly lost no time in setting to work. 
In a letter of the 5th of March to Farnese the presiding 
Cardinal-Legates- asked what they were to do if the sick- 
ness continued. They did not, however, await the arrival 
of instructions from the Pope. As the alarm among the 
Fathers was further increased on the following day, the 6th 
of March, by the death of Bishop Loffredo of Capaccio, they 
judged that no more time was to be lost, and after receiving 
a medical certificate of the infectious character of the 
disease from Balduino Balduini, private physican to del 
Monte, and from Girolamo Fracastoro, physician to the 

* See Ehses in Rom. Quartalschr., XIX., 184 j^f. ; cf. Vermeulen, 
Die Verlegung der Koniils von Trient, Regensburg, 1890. 


Council, brought the matter on the 9th of March before the 
general congregation. Del Monte here announced that 
since the session twelve prelates had left, some without 
having received the required permission and some without 
having even asked for it ; others again had now declared 
that they would go on account of the danger of infection ; 
it was therefore necessary that the Council should come to 
some decision. 

The Legates, as del Monte had made known, did not 
wish to influence their decision, but to be guided by the 
voice of the majority; only they could not give their 
consent to the dissolution of the Synod. Pacheco raised 
the objection whether they had any right to discuss the 
removal of the Council from Trent without previous 
knowledge on the part of the Pope and P2mperor. He 
asked for a few days' postponement ; he had with him the 
Spanish, Neapolitan, and some other prelates. The great 
majority, however, were for the quickest possible removal 
from Trent; opinions only differed as to how this should 
take place — by suspension, or translation, or free permission 
to individuals to absent themselves for a certain time. The 
voting was deferred to the following day. Del Monte then 
announced that the Legates were opposed to a suspension 
as well as to a general dispersal, as both courses might 
lead to dissolution. They thought it best to translate the 
Council to some more suitable spot at not too great a 
distance from Trent ; for preference they recommended 
Bologna as pre-eminently the most fitted. Pacheco again 
spoke in opposition ; the Pope alone could undertake 
to translate the Council ; such a step would arouse the 
displeasure of the Emperor and other princes as well as 
of all Christendom if taken on insufficient grounds ; the 
prevailing sickness did not constitute such a ground, since 
in the opinion of local physicians it was not nearly so 


serious or dangerous as Balduini and Fracastoro had re- 
presented. To the opposition of the Legates, Pacheco 
once more declared that the measure was one solely 
within the Pope's competency, the Legates could not 
decide without special powers to do so. Pacheco was 
supported by the rest of the Imperialist prelates, who 
presented written statements. They concluded by declar- 
ing that if the rest of the Fathers left Trent on inadequate 
grounds, they would remain there, and with them also the 
authority of the Council. Many of the majority wished to 
go at once to the Cathedral and there resolve on the 
translation, but the Legates, in order to avoid the appear- 
ance of tumultuary proceedings, put off any further action 
to the following day. 

In this eighth session,^ held on the nth of March, del 
Monte once more gave a summary of the previous discus- 
sions on the question, made known the ascertained facts 
concerning the sickness, and then read aloud the draft 
decree of translation. After Pacheco had once more 
protested and Archbishop Saraceni of Matera had en- 
countered his objections, the voting took place, which 
resulted in a majority of two-thirds in favour of the decree 
for translation to Bologna.^ Del Monte now informed the 
Fathers for the first time that the Legates had, all along, 
been empowered by a Papal Bull to undertake the trans- 

* Cf. Severoli, ed. Mh-rkle, I., 142-144; Massarelli, Diarium, II., 
III., ibid.^ 466, 625 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 15. 

^ The number of votes is differently stated : Pallavicini says that 
out of 56 Fathers 38 "ayes" voted unconditionally and 14 "noes," 
2 "ayes" conditionally and 2 with a "non liquet." Vermeulen 
(p. 18 seq.) and Knopfler (Kirchenlex., XI. ,2 2070) follow this calcula- 
tion. Severoli gives 34 unconditionally for and 14 unconditionally 
against, 2 with "non liquet." Massarelli says 39 were unconditionally 
in favour and 14 against, while some ("aliqui") voted conditionally and 
some were "neutrales." 

VOL. XII 2% 


latfon of the Council, a fact which they had hitherto kept 
secret so as not to prejudice the freedom of decision. 
They then ordered the Bull of the 22nd of February 1545 
to be read aloud, and forthwith announced the translation 
of the Council to Bologna, where on the previously ap- 
pointed day, the 21st of April, the next session would be 

On the same day the Legates informed Farnese of what 
had occurrv.d, with a request that the Curia would take 
steps to see that the Council in Bologna was more numer- 
ously attended. They also addressed themselves to the 
nuncio Verallo, in order that he, correspondingly instructed 
as to the state of affairs, might defend the translation 
against the Emperor's objections.^ On the 12th of March 
the Legates, with the majority of the Fathers, left Trent. 
On the 22nd Cervini and a certain number of bishops entered 
Bologna, and on the 26th he was followed by del Monte.^ 

^ Sarpi's story that on the very day of the seventh session the Legates 
received a secret command from the Pope to transfer the Council is 
contradicted by Pallavicini (1. 9, c. 13, n. 2 seq.). For the entire 
freedom from interference from the Pope with which the translation of 
the Council was resolved upon, see also Vermeulen, 20 seq. 

2 The letter of the Legates to Farnese of March 11, 1547, in the 
Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 651-655. Extracts from the parallel letters of 
the Legates to Verallo, ibid., 518 n. and 652 and 654 in the notes. 
Cf. also the letter of Pietro Foscheri, Podesta of Trent, to Duke Ercole 
of Ferrara, of March 12, 1547 (ibid., 655 seq), and the letter by an 
unknown writer in an opposite sense (perhaps by one of Madruzzo's 
circle), ibid., 656-659. 

3 For the Council in Bologna and the contemporary events concern- 
ing it, cf. Massarelli, Diarium (IV.), de Concilio Bononiensi a 12 
Martii, 1547, usque ad 10 Novembris, 1549, ed. Merkle, I., 627-873 ; 
Severoli, ed. Merkle, I., 144-147; Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. i7tol. ii, 
c. 6; Vermeulen, 20 seqq. {cf. Liter. Rundschau, 1891, 355); 
Vermeulen, Das XIX. allgemeine Konzil in Bologna, Regensburg, 
1892 ; Knopfler, loc. cit., 2070-2072 ; Nuntiaturberichte, IX. and X. ; 


The Imperialist prelates, fourteen in number,^ remained 
behind in Trent. 

The precipitate removal of the Council to Bologna was 
for the Papal court as well as for all the rest of the world 
a surprise. The majority of the curialists rejoiced when 
the news reached Rome. Not so the far-seeing Pontiff, 
who with characteristic discernment perceived what mis- 
understandings might arise from a measure so hastih' 
taken without his previous consent.^ While he left the 
conciliar Legates in no doubt as to his private opinions,^ 
he did not think it right, seeing that they had acted from 
a real regard for his interests, to disavow them officially. 
The translation, in fact, was to this extent unassailable, 
that it had been voted for by a majority in the Council.* 
In a consistory held on the 25th of March 1547 the Pope 
gave the measure his consent, the only opponents being 
three Cardinals, the Spaniards Juan Alvarez de Toledo and 
Francisco de Mendoza, to whom must be added Sadoleto.^ 

Carcereri, Storia esterna del Concilio di Bologna, Montevarchi, 
1903 ; Ehses in the Rom. Quartalschr., 1902, 429, and Carcereri 
in Arch. Trentino, XVIII. (1903), 64 seq. 

1 See the list in Massarelli, Diarium, IV., ed. Merkle, I., 638 seq. 
Carcereri's proposed work on " II Concilio di Trento dalla traslazione 
alia sospensione " has unfortunately not yet appeared. 

2 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 16 ; Maynier, 511 seq. 

3 He ordered Maffei to be informed that he would have preferred to 
have seen the Council in session at Trent for some months longer. 
Two further sessions would have sufficed to settle the necessary 
decrees, and then perhaps the Synod might have been brought to a 
close (Pallavicini, 1. 9, c. 17). 

* See Wiener Jahrb. der Litteratur, CXV., 115. 

6 Pallavicini (1. 9, c. 16) gives with Massarelli, Diarium, IV, ed. 
Merkle, 633, the 23rd March, while the detailed report of Bonifazio 
Ruggieri places the consistory on the 24th (Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 
528, n. i). In the *Acta Consist. (Consistorial Archives of the 
Vatican) the date is not entered. 


From the first Paul III, supported by Farnese, made 
every effort to prevent this unexpected incident from 
increasing the tension which already existed between him 
and the Emperor. But the ambassador Vega would hear 
of no excuses; to the assurance that the Pope had not 
been a party to the translation he refused to give the 
slightest credence.^ 

Charles V. was of the same opinion. On the 17th of 
March he had despatched a courier to Rome with instruc- 
tions for Vega bidding the latter to express his extreme dis- 
pleasure to the Pope and to demand the immediate recall 
of the Council to Trent The ambassador, who received 
this command on the 24th of March, delivered his message 
on the same evening. Before the audience Cardinal Farnese 
adjured him to show moderation apd " to throw water rather 
than fuel on the fire." " I bring neither water nor fuel," re- 
plied Vega, " but intend to carry out his Majesty's behests." 
As Paul III. was also much excited, the interview would 
have been a stormy one if the Pope at the last moment had 
not exercised a wise self-control. He calmly explained 
to Vega that he had taken no part in the proceedings that 
had led to the translation of the Council. The measure 
had been as great a surprise to him as to the Emperor. 
As the Council had agreed to the measure by a majority 
of more than two-thirds, he could not recall the Synod to 
Trent without derogating from its freedom ; moreover, the 
sickness was still prevalent there. Should the Council 
resolve spontaneously to return, that would be all the more 
agreeable to him, as thereby the Emperor's wishes would 
be realized. But it was desirable that the Synod should 
first assemble in its entirety at the place to which it had 
been legitimately translated. Charles V. would therefore 

* See Maffei's letter of March 26 and Farnese's of April 5, 1547, in 
the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 527 seg., 530 j^^. 


do well to permit the bishops who had remained in Trent 
to proceed to Bologna, as thereby they would have the 
advantage of being able more easily to induce the other 
Fathers to return to Trent for the reasons adduced by the 
Emperor, The sojourn in Bologna could not be looked 
upon as suspicious since, as a matter of fact, a greater 
number of Councils had been held even in Rome itself. 

Bologna, moreover, was encircled by territories the 
princes of which were known to be the most loyal adherents 
of the Emperor. This great city again offered all the 
necessary requisites for the tenure of such an assembly, 
just as it was suited for the eventual meeting in person of 
the Pope and the Emperor, Finally, what concerned the 
security of the Council, which Charles was bound to 
guarantee, could only be discussed when necessity 
demanded, a necessity, however, which at present had not 
arisen, Paul III. added, in conclusion, that if the Emperor 
considered himself to be the eldest son of the Church, he 
at the same time could not forget that as Pope, albeit 
unworthy, he was the Church's head.^ 

Verallo repeated the substance of these declarations on 
the 14th of April 1547 in an audience granted to him in 
Plauen by Charles V. 

The Emperor, who had been suffering all through the 
winter, had for a long time intended to leave the subjection 
of the Saxon Elector, John Frederick, to his brother 
Ferdinand and the Margrave Albert of Culmbach ; he 
thought of going himself to Frankfort-on-Main and from 
there conducting his operations against Philip of Hesse.^ 

• See Farnese's report of April 5, 1547 (zdtd, 531 se^. ; here also is 
the report of the envoy of Ferrara), and that of Vega of March 26, 1547, 
in Maynier, 516, n. i, 

2 See Maurenbrecher, 54* seg., and Ranke, Deutsche Gesch., 
IV., 6th ed., 369. 


He was moved, however, to change his plans ^ by the news 
that John Frederick had, on March the 2nd, succeeded in 
taking prisoner the Margrave Albert in Rochlitz and that 
Ferdinand was threatened by the Bohemian Utraquists. 
Against the advice of his physician he resolved to hasten 
with all possible speed with his whole army to the aid of 
his brother and Duke Maurice, in order to deliver in person 
a decisive blow against John Frederick. By the 13th of 
April he had already crossed the Saxon frontier. His first 
night encampment was at Adorf, the second at Plauen. 

The audience which Verallo had to undergo in the 
latter place made his position almost untenable. He 
would never believe, declared Charles, breaking in upon 
the nuncio's representations, that the translation of the 
Council took place without the Pope's knowledge, since the 
latter had never wished the Synod to meet in Trent ; as 
for the outbreak of an epidemic, that was merely a pretext. 
On Verallo remarking that the Pope would not recall a 
decree of the Council, the Emperor interposed that he had 
long known well that the Pope knew how to turn things so 
as to bring them into accordance with his own wishes. 
He added angrily : " The Pope thinks of nothing but to 
prolong his days, to aggrandize his family, to heap up 
riches ; in order to attain his own ends he rejects the 
duties of his high office. We know him. He is an 
obstinate old man, who is working for the destruction of 
the Church. Those who promised to submit themselves 
to the Council of Trent have now a just excuse for reject- 
ing the Council of Bologna. But there will be a council 
forthcoming which shall correspond to the wishes of all 
Christendom and remove all abuses. We know the full 
extent of our authority, and that it belongs to us as 

* Commentaries, 179. For the threats against Ferdinand I., see 
HUBER, IV., 125 seq. 


Emperor to secure the freedom of the Council whether 
men wish it or not. If necessary we shall send the 
bishops not merely to Bologna but to Rome, and lead 
them thither in person." 

Verallo tried to defend the Pope from such immoderate 
attacks. He remarked, among other observations, that the 
bishops who were in Bologna had gone there of their own 
free will, while those in Trent remained there at his 
Majesty's pleasure. It must therefore be said of the 
latter that they were deprived of freedom ; no one could 
assert that of the former. This very apposite remark had 
such an effect on the Emperor that he exclaimed : " Go, 
nuncio ; I am not going to argue with you. When you 
have any business to transact, take it to Granvelle." ^ 

Ten days after this audience the arbitrament was settled 
on the field of Miihlberg on the Elbe; the Emperor in a 
few hours broke up the whole Saxon army and took the 
Elector John Frederick prisoner. It was not a battle, said 
Melanchthon, but a helter-skelter rout.^ The Imperialist 
loss amounted to about fifty men, including those who 
succumbed later to their wounds. Of the Electoral troops 
more than 2000 fell. They lost all their banners, 21 guns, 
and 600 waggons with munitions and stores.^ 

On the 5th of May the Emperor stood before Wittem- 
berg ; on :he 19th a treaty was there concluded, the terms 
of which included John Frederick's renunciation of the 

* See Verallo's report, written also on April 14, 1547, in the Nuntia- 
turberichte, IX., 536 seq., and Charles V.'s letter to Mendoza of 
April 15, 1547, in Maurenbrecher, 106* seq., and Maynier, 520, 
n. I. 

2 Corp. ref., VI., 587. 

3 See Lenz, Die Schlacht bei Miihlberg, Gotha, 1879; Janssen- 
Pastor, III., i8th ed., 659 seg ; \'enet. Uepeschen, II., 234 seg. ', 
Nuntiaturberichte, IX , 547. 


Electorate and the surrender of all his fortresses. The 
overthrow of the Elector was followed by the submission 
of the Lower Saxon Circle and on June the 19th by that 
of Philip of Hesse. Utterly discouraged and intimidated, 
the latter prince surrendered at discretion. The Emperor 
handed him over, like the Elector, to strict custody.^ The 
victory was complete, and more brilliant than the cautious 
Emperor had dared to hope. 

The news of the overwhelming success in north Germany 
made all the deeper impression in Rome ^ as shortly before 
deceptive reports had been received of the long struggle 
with his adversaries that still awaited Charles V. Instead 
of that the monarch, who had indulged in such menacing 
language to Verallo, had reached a fulness of power which 
no Roman-Germanic Emperor had possessed for centuries. 
The Pope's fears of Charles V. were increased, for with 
the death of Francis I. on March the 31st the check which 
he had hoped to find in France became very insecure. 
Not only did the Imperialist Montmorency regain his 
influence with the new King, but Henry II. also showed 
himself indisposed to favour a Council over which Papal 
influence prevailed.^ Consequently, the new ambassador, 
Diego Mendoza, who had taken Vega's place on the nth 
of April, found Paul III. much more accessible. Even 
when Mendoza brought out his threats of an Imperial 
protest and a national council Paul III. maintained his 
composure unruffled.* At the same time the Fathers in 
Bologna carried concession so far as to determine on the 
19th of April to put off the publication of the decree until 

> Cf. J ANSSL'N- Pastor, III., i8th ed., 661, 663 seqq. 

2 Cf. Campana, 393, 394. 

3 See Druffel, Sfondrato, 322-324. 

* See Ruggieri's report of April 30, 1547, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., xxxii, n. 2. 

farnese's efforts for mediation. 361 

the 2nd of June and in the session fixed for the 2ist of 
April only to announce its prorogation.^ 

The victory of Miihlberg was first announced to Paul III. 
by Mendoza^ and then in a letter from Ferdinand I. of 
the 25th of April.^ The Pope answered on the 20th of 
May ;* ten days later he wrote a letter of congratulation 
to the Emperor,^ and the event was celebrated by a 
solemn service in St. Peter's. 

Cardinal Farnese was at this time in a fever of anxiety 
to compose the differences between the Emperor and the 
Pope. With Mendoza on the one hand, with the Pope and 
powerful Cardinals such as Morone, Crescenzi, Ardinghello, 
and Santafiora on the other, he kept up indefatigable nego- 
tiations. He was successful in arriving at an arrangement 
with Charles V. on the promised subsidies from the Spanish 
Church. After Mendoza had agreed that the sum to be 
raised on the sale of conventual property was not to exceed 
400,000 ducats, the Pope gave his consent to the pre- 
paration of the necessary Bull, although it seemed to him 
that, in view of the most recent events, the Emperor's 
opposition to the translation of the Council and the use- 
lessness of the victory in Germany for the Church, he 
might well have refused.*" 

Cardinal Farnese held out hopes to the Imperialists of 

* See Massarelli, Diarium, IV., ed. Merkle, I., 642 ; Pallavicini, 
1. 9, c. 20, n. 4. 

^ Nuntiaturberichte, X., 532, 538. 

2 This letter is published in the Nuntiaturberichte, IX., 677 seq.^ from 
the draft in Court and State Archives, Vienna. 

* See *Brevia Pauh III. (Arm., 41, t. 39, n. 475, Secret Archives of 
the Vatican) in Appendix No. 34. 

^ Raynaldus, 1547, n. loi. On July 29 Paul III. congratulated 
Ferdinand on the successes in Bohemia (see ibid.^ n. 104). 

® See Farnese to VerallOjdat. May 31, 1547 (Nuntiaturberichte, X., 5); 
cf. DoLLiNGER, Beitrage, I., 84. 


further generous support in money. Even Paul III. 
expressed himself favourably on this point. Farnese left 
Mendoza in no doubt as to the leading motive of his busy 
efforts at mediation ; an arrangement, he thought, might 
be reached on all points if only the Emperor would invest 
Pier Luigi with Parma and Piacenza or Siena.^ On the 
conciliar question Farnese and Mendoza were united on 
a middle course, the acceptance of which, however, by the 
Emperor was very doubtful. This was that the Council 
should again return to Trent or to some neighbouring city 
in German territory, as soon as the Emperor should have 
ascertained that the Diet or the individual Estates of 
Germany had pledged themselves to place the questions 
of religion under the arbitrament of the reassembled 
Council or to accept the decrees of that Synod. In the 
meantime the Fathers who had not left Trent should 
betake themselves to Bologna and there, while for the 
present avoiding dogmatic questions, continue to deal 
exclusively with measures of reform.^ 

Paul 111. had refused at first to make any concessions 
on the question of the Council, having remarked to 
Mendoza that Christ had addressed to St. Peter and not 
to the Emperor the words : Upon this rock will I build my 
church.^ Nevertheless he at last turned an ear to the new 
proposals, and on May the 31st Cardinal Sfondrato, who 
had already started oa his journey to the Emperor on the 
22nd of April, was given full powers to enter upon the 
arrangement agreed upon between Mendoza and Farnese.* 

1 See Mendoza's reports in Dollinger, I., 57 seq. ; cf. de Leva, 
323 seq. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxxiii, 3 seq. 

3 Pallavicini, 1. 10, C. I. 

* Nuntiaturberichte, X., 2 seq. For the deep-seated distrust of 
Charles V. on the part of Paul III., cf. Legazioni di A. Serristori, 161 seq. 


Before this suggestions had come from Rome to Bologna, 
where the Emperor's victory also had been celebrated, 
to await the result of the negotiations with Mendoza and 
to postpone the next session until the middle of August, 
The Fathers at Bologna therefore determined to fix a 
date later than the 2nd of June, the day appointed for 
the future session, since the Pope wished it; the 15th of 
September was accordingly the day chosen.^ 

This concession was due mainly to the hope entertained 
in Bologna as well as in Rome that Cardinal Sfondrato, 
in his Legatine capacity, would allay the quarrel with 
Charles V. This noble Milanese seemed to be the right 
man for the task, as in former days he had once done good 
service in the cause of Imperial policy. In addition to his 
previous instructions to obtain Charles's consent to an 
undertaking against England, he was also to secure from 
him the recognition of the Council at Bologna or at least a 
pledge that he would not take any measures detrimental 
to its success. Then, as an after-thought, he was to intro- 
duce the subject of the joint proposal of mediation in the 
matter of the Council arranged by Mendoza and Farnese.- 

Cardinal Sfondrato, who entered on his difificult mission 
in no sanguine mood, travelled very slowly. It was the 
beginning of July 1547 when he first met the Emperor at 
Bamberg, where, on the 4th of that month, he had an audi- 
ence. Charles accorded a friendly reception to the Legate, 
who first congratulated him on the victorious close of the 
campaign, but refused curtly and firmly to interfere in 

1 See Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. Merkle, I., 658 seq. \ Palla- 
viciNi, 1. 10, c. I ; DE Leva, IV., 321 seq. 

2 See DOLLINGER, Beitrage, I., ^^seqq. ; Druffel, Beitrage, I., 51 
seq., and Sfondrato, 374 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxiv ; here 
(xxii seq^ there is also more concerning the personahties of the Legates. 
Cf. also for Sfondrato, Arch. stor. Lomb., 1894, 27 seqq. 


English affairs. Germany, where enough still remained to 
be done, was nearer his thoughts ; he had, especially after 
his recent experiences, no inclination to look after the 
business of other people as commander-in-chief, and finally 
declared himself heartily sick of campaigning. Sfondrato, 
with eulogiums of Mendoza, then introduced the subject 
of mediation with regard to the Council, but here also the 
Emperor, determined on the unconditional meeting of the 
Synod at Trent, met him with a positive refusal. In the 
proposal that the Diet, before the return of the Council to 
Trent, should declare its submission to the conciliar decrees, 
Charles saw only a purposely devised scheme to get rid of 
the Council altogether. He said this openly, and remarked 
that methods would not be wanting of counteracting such 
a decision. The Legate dismissed this suspicion as un- 
founded, so far as the Pope was concerned, and insisted 
that it was against the dignity of the Council to be again 
recalled to Trent out of consideration for the German 
nation, if no guarantee were given that that very nation 
would suspend its hostility towards the Synod. When the 
Legate at last requested the Emperor at least to ratify the 
acceptance of the decrees as they now stood, while the 
stamp of victory was fresh upon him, he received a scornful 
rebuff. As he perceived, said Charles, that the Legate had 
been well instructed on all points, nothing remained for him 
to say save that in matters of religion he would do his duty 
and hoped that others would do the same. The Legate 
replied that this was also the intention of the Pope, and it 
followed that the only difference lay in the choice of means 
towards that end. He begged his Majesty to give the 
matter more mature consideration, as the proposals of 
mediation had commended themselves to Mendoza. The 
Emperor, however, rejoined that it would not be astonishing 
if Mendoza had made a mistake. It would not be neces- 


sary for hitn now to give the matter further reflection, since 
he had devoted more thought to this than to the war itself. 
After this hard refusal of all his proposals, the Legate 
asked if, in view of the fruitlessness of further discussion, it 
would not be better that he should withdraw, to which the 
Emperor replied coldly " that he might do as he chose." ^ 

The Emperor's rudeness and inflexibility made such an 
impression on Sfondrato that together with his official 
report on the 7th of July he sent a private letter to Farnese 
in which he implored him to come round on the question 
of the Council and at least to support a suspension of the 
Synod at Bologna, as otherwise there was a great danger 
of the powerful Emperor provoking a schism. The Legate 
was confirmed in this opinion by the continued discourtesy 
of Charles, who for a long time refused him any audience on 
the pretext of indisposition. Alba, Soto, and Madruzzo also 
begged Sfondrato, in the interests of the Church, to induce 
the Pope to consent to the return of the Council to Trent.^ 

In a letter to Maflei on the 31st of July, Sfondrato wrote 
that he would rather incur the blame of the public at large 
by advising a course of conduct unpopular at Rome than 
burden his conscience by silence. The Emperor, he set 
forth in a memorial sent at the same time, is unchangeable 
in his demand that the Council should return to Trent. If 
he is told that this cannot possibly be done without the 
consent of the Council, he replies that it depends solely and 
entirely on the Pope. If it is suggested that the Council 
of Trent has waited already two whole years for the German 
nation and that the Emperor now has the power in his 

* See Sfondrato's report to Farnese of July 7, 1547, in the Nuntia- 
turberichte, X., 35 seqq. Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 3 ; Druffel, 
Sfondrato, 328 seq. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, X., 39 seq., 43 seq.., 53 seq.. and Druffel, loc 
cii., 332 seq. 


hands to force that nation to return to the Church, the 
Imperial rejoinder is, that that is only possible by means 
of the Council and that the Councfl must be assembled in 
Trent. If it is pointed out that Trent cannot offer 
adequate certainty of freedom to the Council, the Imperial 
contradiction is ready that numerous decrees on dogma 
have been passed there in opposition to the express orders 
of the Emperor. If it is pointed out that in the case of 
Paul 1 1 1.'s death the Council in Trent might introduce some 
innovation in the mode of Papal election or, vacante sede, 
some reform disadvantageous to the Holy See, the counter- 
allegation is raised that the very same objections were 
mooted when Trent v^as originally proposed as the seat of 
the Council and yet were at that time rejected. Besides, 
the same reasons are adducible also in the case of Bologna.^ 
In Rome, Sfondrato's behaviour was subjected to strong 
criticism. The most important Cardinals, Farnese, 
Crescenzi, Morone, Ardinghello, and Santafiora, took excep- 
tion to the nuncio's precipitate declarations on his first 
audience.^ The situation was made more complicated by 
an illness which for eight days incapacitated the Pope from 
holding audiences. It was only a case of obstinate 
catarrh; but at Paul III.'s great age even a slight indis- 
position might lead to fatal results. In that event it was 
more than doubtful that a Council would be held on 
German soil. No one, it was the general opinion, could, 
under such circumstances, feel perfectly certain of the 
security of the Papal election.^ 

* Nuntiaturberichte, X., 64 seqq. 

2 See the report, ibid., 55, n. i. 

3 Cf. DOLLINGER, Beitrage, [.,80,91,97; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 55, 
n. I ; BUCHOLTZ, VI., 198, and Paolo Mario's *report to the Duchess 
of Urbino, dat. Rome, July 15, 1547 (State Archives, Florence), who 
insists on medical evidence on the strength of Paul's constitution. 


Paul III. took counsel with his confidential advisers on 
the 17th of July as to what should be done. It was 
determined that the Council must remain free, and decide 
for itself whether it would return to Trent or move else- 
where. The Pope, reported the Florentine envoy on July 
the 1 8th, was much annoyed at the Emperor for not waiting 
until the Diet of the Empire met, but simply demanding 
the recall to Trent. That incited the Pope to equal 
obstinacy. Moreover, he certainly was counting upon 
the Emperor's want of money, his preoccupation with 
German affairs, and the probability that he might have to 
face difficulties in Italy as well.^ The last remark referred 
to the Papal endeavours to prepare the way for an alliance 
with France and to extend this into a formal anti- 
imperialist coalition. Mendoza, who was informed of 
these intrigues, displayed no alarm. There is always talk 
going on, he said, of alliances against the Emperor, but 
these are so formed that the treaties have hardly been con- 
cluded before they end in a competition of all the allies 
for recnnciliation with the object of their attack.^ 

* See Serristoh's letter in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 55, n. r. 

^ Cf.T)¥. Leva, IV., 319 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxxix ; Brosch, I., 
183; Mitteil. des osterr. Instituts, XXIII., 141. The alliance with 
France was to be sealed by the marriage of Orazio Farnese with 
Diane de Poitiers; the betrothal took place in June 1547 (Nuntia- 
turberichte, X., 62, n. I ; cf. Atti d. soc. Ligur., VIII., Doc. 105). On 
June 29, 1547, the wedding of Vittoria Farnese with the Duke of 
Urbino was celebrated (see Mendoza's report in DOLLINGER, I., 90 ; 
cf. also Feliciangeli, 218). While the marriage was being 
arranged the Duke's younger brother, Giulio della Rovere {cf. Manni, 
Osserv. s. i sigilli antichi, VII., 31 ; X., 143), was promised the red hat 
(DoLLiNGER, I., 69, 81 ; RiEiER, II., 25). When on July 27, 1547, a 
nomination of Cardinals took place, the only one named was Charles 
Guise of Lorraine, a second (Giulio) was reserved z"« pei/o (see the 
^report of Paolo Mario to the Duke of Urbino of July 27, 1547, in the 
State Archives, Florence, whereby ClACONlus, III., 724 seq., and 


Although many expressed themselves in favour of a 
return to Trent, the Pope remained firm in his refusal, and 
with all the more tenacity as the prospects of the Council 
at Bologna were improving. It seemed as insupportable 
as ever that the Emperor, the head of secular dominion, 
should arrogate to himself the final decision in the spiritual 
sphere as well.^ 

From this certainly justifiable standpoint the Pope 
would not budge for some time longer ; but at last he 
recoiled in alarm at the incalculable consequences of a 
complete breach with the victorious monarch. Cardinals 
Farnese and Crescenzi supported Mendoza's representa- 
tions, who, in accordance with his master's instructions, did 
not omit to utter threats of a solemn protest against the 
Synod of Bologna.^ Thus the Pope decided to make a 
partial surrender. At the beginning of September the 
following agreement was come to at the Pope's summer 
residence in Foligno. The sitting of the Council fixed for 
the 15th of September was postponed until the situation 
as developed by the Diet of Augsburg should be made 
known ; in the interval no conciliar acts were to be under- 
taken ; therefore the prorogation, which was to be for an 
indefinite time, was only settled in a simple congregation. 
If a session were appointed the Pope was to give four- 
teen days' notice to the Spanish ambassador. Paul III., 

Cardella, IV., 284 seg'., are to be corrected). Giulio's publication 
with that of Charles de Bourbon did not take place until Jan. 9, 1548 
(see Druffel, Beitrage, I., 90). The coat of arms of Cardinal G. 
della Rovere in the Pinacoteca of Todi, with the then customary 
Cardinal's hat with six tassels, in Pasini-FRAssoni, I cappelli prelatizi 
Roma, 1908, 10. 

1 See Maurenbrecher, 149 ; Druffel, Sfondrato, 335 seg. ; 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 86, n. 2. 

2 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, X., 87, n. I, 515. 


Cardinal Farnese, and the Legates at Bologna gave their 
word that the agreement would be observed.^ 

At this juncture a deed of blood, the assassination of 
Pier Luigi Farnese, the Pope's son, by the Imperialist 
Viceroy, Ferrante Gonzaga, cut asunder the threads which 
had just been reunited and threw all things into confusion. 

The Italian policy of Charles V. had undergone a decided 
change since the appointment of Ferrante Gonzaga as 
Viceroy of Milan. With the zeal of a genuine renegade 
this man had courted the favour of the Emperor by stirring 
up his animosity against the Italians.^ The determination 
of the Spaniards to strengthen, by annexations, the position 
which the possession of Milan and Naples gave them 
became clearer day by day. Besides enterprises in Genoa 
and Siena, the acquisition of Parma and Piacenza was 
further aimed at.^ As early as June 1546 the Emperor 
had let Ferrante Gonzaga understand that he was only 
awaiting the death of the aged Pope to destroy Pier Luigi.* 
The latter had formed close connections with the French and 
was in association with all in Italy by whom the Spanish 
supremacy was regarded as unbearable. The Imperialists 
believed that in the conspiracy of Fiesco in Genoa the 
traces of the Farnese influence were to be discerned.^ 

The plan of Ferrante Gonzaga to overthrow his incon- 

1 Cf. Maynier, 530 seq. ; DE LEVA, IV., 339 ; DruffEL, Sfondrato, 
344 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxxv, \ob seqq., 557 seq.^ 569. In Bologna 
in a general congregation of Sept. 14, 1547, the next session was 
postponed sine die (Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. Merkle, I., 695). 

2 Cf. Mocenigo's report in FlEDLER, 130. 

3 See Maurenbrecher, 155 seq., 159 ; Balan, VI., 391. 

* See Affo, 112 ; DE Leva, IV., 355. 

* Cf. DE Leva, IV., 240 sc.q.^ 244 seq. ; BelgraNO in Arch. stor. Ital., 
3rd Series, IV., i, 216 seq.; Landau in the Allgem. Zeitung, 1887, 
Beil. 35, who considers the evidence of Paul III.'s participation incon- 
clusive ; so also Manfroni, 365 seq. 

VOL. XII. 24 


venient and dangerous neighbour, with whom personal 
dissensions were constantly breaking out, was favoured by 
the internal conditions of the Duchy of Parma-Piacenza. 
Pier Luigi had here made for himself more bitter enemies 
by the rigour of his administration and the harsh assertion 
of his territorial authority than by his dissolute life. In 
general his government was no better and no worse than 
that of most of the petty Italian princes of that day. Like 
Cosimo de' Medici he also strove to form a homogeneous 
state out of the conflicting portions of his domain, but in 
this attempt he came into collision, before all others, with 
the insubordinate nobility. Accustomed to the lenient 
rule of the Church, these small barons chafed impatiently 
under the strong hand of the new ruler who, in proportion 
as he improved the condition of the people, set limits to the 
feudal privileges of their masters.^ 

The dissatisfaction grew when Pier Luigi formed under 
his own immediate command a territorial militia and, with 
characteristic disregard for others, began to erect in Parma 
as well as in Piacenza a huge citadel. By the end of 1546 
Ferrante Gonzaga had made proposals to the Emperor that 
he should employ the discontented nobles to overthrow 
Farnese.2 Impressed by Farnese's attitude towards the 

* The first supporter of this view of Farnese, who had been appointed 
simply in the first instance as " Tiranno," is L. Scarabelli : Dell' 
ultima ducea di Pier Luigi Farnese, Bologna, 1868. This defence, 
which certainly goes too far here and there {cf. Arch. stor. Ital., 3rd 
Series, IX., 2, 226 seq.\ has been adopted by Reumont (III., 2, 501), 
Balan (VI., 395), Bertolotti (in the Atti dell' Emilia, III., 27 seg., 
49 seq.), and Giarelli (Storia di Piacenza, Piacenza, 1889). Recently 
Scapinelli has treated the question from the like point of view 
(Rassegna naz., I. [1906], 182 seq., Le riforme sociali del duca Pier 
Luigi) and MassiGNAN (p. 61 seq., cf. y>- m ^^g-)- 

- See Gonzaga's letter of Dec. 30, 1546, in Maurenbrecher, 156, 
n. 15. For the building of the citadel of Piacenza, see Atti Mod.. I., 


conspiracy of Fiasco, the Emperor listened to Ferrante's 
schemes with assent, but only in the case of a vacancy in 
the Holy See.^ Ferrante Gonzaga, embittered by personal 
quarrels and constantly goaded on by Doria against 
Farnese,^ was loath to wait so long ; he tried hard to 
obtain the Emperor's permission to hazard an early 
blow. In the spring of 1547 he set forth in detail how 
favourable the situation was for securing Parma and 
Piacenza by a sudden stroke.^ But Charles V. had fresh 
scruples ; he turned with a shudder from Gonzaga's 
murderous plot when it lay before him point by point ; 
and he was also struck by the unwisdom of thus directly 
conjuring up the vengeance of the Pope. But after- 
wards, when the translation of the Council took place, 
he gave his consent on May the 31st to the forcible 
expulsion of Pier Luigi.* 

Ferrante Gonzaga without delay made all the necessary 
arrangements with the malcontent nobles. Seeing that the 
works of the citadel of Piacenza were far advanced, and 
that there was a danger of the conspirators making an 
alliance with France, he urged upon the Emperor that the 
moment to strike had come at last. The latter gave his 
consent, but on the emphatic condition that the Duke's 
life should be spared. Gonzaga was at pains to obtain a 

480 seq. ; Massignan, 71 seq. Cf. Arch. stor. Ital., 4th Series, XIV., 

1 See Charles V. to Gonzaga, Jan. 14, 1547, in the Atti d. Soc. Ligur., 
VIII., Doc. 36, and in Maurenbrecher, 157. 

2 Scipio de Castro insists on this in the *Avvertimenti et ricordi 
al duca di Terranova, governat. di Milano, in the Inf. polit., XII., 
f. I7^ of the Royal Library, Berlin. Another copy in the Ambrosian 
Library, Milan. 

^ See the documents in Odorici, 67 seq. ; Affo, 145 seq. ; DE Leva, 
IV., 357 seq. 
* See Maurenbrecher, 157 ; de Leva, IV., 361 seq. 


promise from the conspirators, with the express approval of 
Charles ; ^ but they firmly refused to enter into the condi- 
tions laid down by the Emperor. Gonzaga therefore let it 
drop and, indeed, assured all the participators in the deed 
of immunity from punishment for all murders committed 
in the execution of their design. After all the prepara- 
tions had been made with scrupulous care a postpone- 
ment was caused by the presence of Ottavio Farnese with 
his father.^ 

Ottavio had hardly taken his departure when the con- 
spirators made ready for their crime. While the Duke, for 
whom his astrologer had predicted length of years, sat at 
table at midday on the lOth of September 1547 with a 
brilliant retinue, foreboding no evil, the murderers stole one 
by one into the citadel of Piacenza, unhindered by the un- 
suspecting German bodyguard. After the Duke had risen 
from table Count Giovanni Anguissola and two privy to 
the plot forced their way into his chamber and struck him 
down with a dagger. The rest of the band had in the 
meantime overpowered the guard and taken possession of 
the citadel. In vain Alessandro Tommasoni, commander 
of the ducal troops, tried to penetrate withiri the main 
building, from the window of which the bleeding corpse of 
Pier Luigi was flung into the trench.^ 

^ Cf. Affo, 157 seq., 178 seq. ; Maurenbrecher, 158. 

2 Cf. Affo, 164 seq. ; Odorici, 93 seq. ; de Leva, 363 seq. 

3 Cf. Faleti, 370 seq. ; Adriani, VI., 2 ; Affo, ij()seq. ; Odorici, 
53 seq. ; Balan, VI., 394 ; Bertolotti, La morte di P. L. Farnese ; 
Processo e lettere ined. (Atti dell' Emilia, III., i, 25 seqq. ; 
MassiGNAN, 98 seq.). For the chief of the conspirators, G. Anguissola, 
and his relations with Spain, see Bonardi in Arch. stor. Lomb., 1895. 
The murder gave rise to several pamphlets deploring the crime (see 
Lamento p. la morte di P. L. Farnese p. da G. Capasso, Parma, 1894). 
Marmitta addressed poem of condolence to Paul III. (see Atti Mod., 
I., 153). 


Among the people the murder met with no response ; 
the city authorities likewise would not hear of any change 
of government. Nevertheless, the fate of Piacenza was 
already decided. Ferrante Gonzaga hastened thither and 
on the 1 2th of September occupied the city in the Emperor's 
name, after promising the conspirators on Charles's behalf 
that the city should never again be delivered to the Pope 
or a Farnese. It was only the vigilance of the com- 
mandant that prevented Parma also from falling into the 
Imperialists' hands. On the i6th of September, Ottavio,the 
murdered man's eldest son, had already made his entry ,^ 

This terrible blow, which seemed to many contempor- 
aries to be the punishment of heaven for the Pope's 
inordinate nepotism, struck the Pontiff like a lightning 
flash from a clear sky. On that very loth of September 
Paul III., then staying in Perugia, had an interview with 
Mendoza in which he talked of the course of his career and 
extolled his luck.^ On that same day, and perhaps at the 
self-same hour, his son fell dead at the hand of the 

Deeply as the Pope must have felt this calamity as a 
father and as a sovereign, yet the aged man, weak in 
body and vigorous in mind, never lost his composure for a 
moment. When Cardinal Farnese brought him the fearful 
tidings he only lamented that he was too fortunate and 
therefore open to such a counter-stroke ; but this event was 

* Cf. Affo, i8i seq. ; DE Leva, IV., 369 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 
114, 115 n. 

2 See Mendoza's report of Sept. 18, 1547, in Dollinger, Beitrage, 
I., 114. The good fortune of Paul III. was the subject of letter from 
Giovio (Lettere 32), June 1547. For the stay in Perugia, see Bon- 
tempi, 394; cf. *Acta Consist., "Die iovis 25 Augusti 1547 S. D. N 
discessit ab urbe Perusiam versus. Die veneris ultima Septembris 
1547 fuit reditus S. S. 1I civitate Perusiae ad alniam urbem" (Con- 
sistorial Archives of the Vatican). 


indeed too hard a blow.^ To save Piacenza, whose magis- 
trates had sent him a letter of condolence on the loth 
of September with assurances of loyalty ,2 he despatched 
on the 13th Cardinal Cervini as Legate in order to rescue 
that city for the States of the Church.^ By whom the 
blow had been delivered was not long a mystery to 
Paul III. By the 15th of September he was firmly con- 
vinced that all must have been done with the connivance 
of the Emperor and his servants, especially Ferrante.* 

Such then were the circumstances under which the 
question of the Council and that of the reorganization of 
religion in Germany awaited a final solution. 

* See Ruggieri's report of Sept. 17, 1547, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 115, n. I ; f/; ibid., 116. The terrible news reached Perugia on 
Sept. 12 (BoNTEMPi, 394) and was known in Rome on the 14th (see 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 522 ; Legaz. di A. Serristori, 160 seq?). 

2 Printed in Spicil. Vatic, I. (1890), 74. There is a similar letter to 
Cardinal A. Farnese of Sept. 10, 1547, in the archives of the Spanish 
Embassy at Rome. 

3 *Briefto Cardinal Cervini, dat. Perusiae (Min. brev. Arm.,41, t. 40, 
n. 745 ; Secret Archives of the Vatican) ; original in the State 
Archives, Naples. 

* See F. Rodi's *report of Sept. 15, 1547, in BaLAN, VI., 395 ; cf. also 
Legazioni di A. Serristori, 161; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 115, n. i; 
DoLLiNGER, Beitrage, I., 121. 


The Emperor in Opposition to the Pope and the 
Authority of the Council. 

In the German war Charles V. had made a brilliant 
display of his superiority over all his opponents: the 
Schmalkaldic League was shattered, and its leaders, the 
Saxon Elector and the Landgrave of Hesse, made prisoners. 
The Emperor seemed to have reached the summit of his 
power. The reorganization of the religious condition of 
Germany, which had been suspended during the war, no 
longer admitted of any postponement. With the destruc- 
tion of the political power of the Protestant Estates only 
one-half of the task assigned to himself by Charles was 
fulfilled ; the other and more difficult half had now to be 
accomplished : the restoration of religious unity. Deeply 
convinced of the truth of Catholic doctrine, the Emperor 
sincerely desired this unity, but only in the sense that he, 
the temporal head of Christendom, should outweigh in 
influence the spiritual head, the Pope. 

As protector of the Church the Emperor held himself 
to be justified in claiming not only in the political but also 
in the ecclesiastical sphere the casting vote on all critical 
questions. Paul HI., who saw clearly through this pre- 
tension, was not disposed, however, to sink himself to the 
level of an Imperial vassal or chaplain. It was by no means 
his nepotism only, but rather his determination from a 
sense of duty to preserve his independence and freedom 
as Pope which drew Paul III. into antagonism to the 



monarch " who wished to have all Italy at his free dis- 
posal, to secularize in Spain, to dictate in Trent, and to 
adjudicate at his own tribunal on the great controversy 
on religion in Germany." ^ 

The opposition between the two potentates, which had 
been declared openly during the Schmalkaldic war, 
appeared to have reached the point of rupture when 
Pier Luigi fell murdered at Imperial instigation and 
simultaneously Piacenza was seized without a semblance 
of legal right 2 by Ferrante Gonzaga, the Emperor's 
viceroy in Milan. 

The situation was now made worse by the unworthy 
behaviour of the Imperialists towards the aged Pope and 
his Legate, Cardinal Sfondrato. At first the most 
deliberate dissimulation was practised in order to prove 
that the assassination had taken place without the 
Emperor's knowledge. Already on the evening of the 
13th of September 1547 Granvelle hastened to Sfondrato 
and showed him a letter from Ferrante Gonzaga assuring 
the Emperor's minister that the first news of the murder 
had just reached him, after the event. On the i6th 
Granvelle came once more to announce that Piacenza 
had surrendered to the Emperor. Sfondrato was not at 
a loss to declare that the speedy re-delivery of the city 
to Ottavio Farnese, the murdered man's son and son-in- 
law of the Emperor, must be the touchstone of his 
innocence as regards the catastrophe and of his upright- 
ness of intention towards the Pope.^ 

* Bezold, Gesch. der Reformation, 795 ; cj. also Ranke, Deutsche 
Gesch., 6th ed., V., tj. 

2 See Brosch (I., 186), who describes Ferrante's act as that of a 

" See Sfondrato's letter of Sept. 17 in the Nuntiaturberichte, X.,' 
1 1 7 seqq. 


It was not until two days later that Sfondrato had an 
opportunity, after a High Mass, of seeing Charles, who 
had been laid up for some time with gout. The latter 
remarked on this occasion of his own accord and with 
every apparent sign of sorrow, that he had heard of the 
events at Piacenza with no other feelings than those of in- 
dignation both on account of the murdered Duke himself 
and of the Pope, and that he was longing for the arrival of 
an envoy from Gonzaga with fuller information. The 
Cardinal-Legate, knowing very well that the occasion did 
not permit of further discussion, confined himself to re- 
questing the Emperor to take such measures as would be 
consonant with his lofty station, his justice, and his high 

After the arrival of Ferrante's emissary Granvelle once 
more gave assurance of the viceroy's innocence. He had 
found himself compelled to comply with the invitation 
of the inhabitants of Piacenza themselves, who would 
otherwise have handed over the city to the French ; 
among the conditions to which he had to agree was one 
prohibiting the transfer of Piacenza either to the family 
of Farnese or to the Papal States. The Legate rejoined 
that he did not intend to investigate the question of 
Gonzaga's innocence ; he was content with the fact that 
the city was occupied by Imperialist troops while belong- 
ing by every title of law to Ottavio Farnese. Granvelle 
replied vaguely that the Emperor would give orders such 
as the occasion required, but that astonishment was felt 
that no instructions had come from the Pope. The Legate 
was able to reply, with reason, that it was the duty of the 
Emperor and the person who had taken possession to give 
explanation to the Pope, who was the injured, and, he 

* See Sfondrato's despatch of Sept. 18, 1547, in PALLAVicmr, 1. 10, 
c. 5, n. 4; also partly in Nuntiaturberlchte, X., 120, n. I. 


might add, the plundered party. Hereupon Granvelle 
assured him that such had been the Emperor's intention, 
but that he had awaited the arrival of Gonzaga's envoy 
and also had been afraid of a summons to the French 
from Piacenza. Sfondrato met this by saying that if the 
immediate delivery of the city were refused, the greatest 
embroilment in political and ecclesiastical relations would 

The Emperor even brought himself to despatch his 
court official, Figueroa, to Ottavio Farnese and the Pope 
with messages of condolence^ and a denial of all com- 
plicity in the deeds committed in Piacenza. On his 
return from a hunting party on the 2nd of October he 
received both the Cardinal-Legate and Ottavio's repre- 
sentative, Count Sforza Pallavicini. The Legate, who was 
given audience first, remarked that although he had not 
yet received from the Pope any instruction with regard 
to his attitude towards the events at Piacenza, he could 
not refrain from saying that the occasion was of the utmost 
importance and one on which it was imperative that his 
Majesty should declare his mind. He made no conceal- 
ment that no credence could be given to Ferrante's plea 
of justification, and once more urged the immediate 
restoration of Piacenza to Ottavio Farnese. Charles 
attempted to defend Gonzaga, and declared that his own 
affection for Ottavio was that of a father for his son ; but 
he was of opinion that the Duke could not ask more from 
him than he was receiving from the Pope ; the behaviour 
of Paul HI. could not conduce to benefits towards Ottavio. 

* Sfondrato's letter of Sept. 21, 1547, in Pallavicini, 1. lo, c. 5, 
n. 5, and partly in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 120 seqq. 

2 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, X., 126, 142. The letter of credence from 
Charles V. here printed, of Sept. 25, 1547, was already published in 
Spicil. Vatic, I., 76. 


Here the Legate thought that he must interpose with the 
observation that the Emperor had made similar remarks on 
various occasions ; he therefore could not avoid reminding 
his Majesty that the Pope not only on repeated occasions 
had refrained from courses injurious to the Imperial 
interests, but had expended a substantial portion of his 
income on services rendered to Charles, and that to those 
very contributions the victory in Germany was for the 
most part owing. 

As the Emperor made no answer to these outspoken 
utterances, the Cardinal went on to describe the trouble 
which would arise everywhere, especially in the affairs of 
the Council, if on the question of Piacenza a miscarriage 
of justice were to be allowed. Charles replied that private 
concerns ought never to exercise an influence on public 
affairs, whereupon the Cardinal remarked that such influence 
was sure to be exercised when its source was, in both cases, 
the same, namely, mutual confidence or mutual distrust. 
The Emperor now tried to bring the interview to an end by 
assuring Sfondrato that his dutiful reverence and obedience 
towards the Holy See would never fail ; in the Diet now 
begun he would do everything that was possible on behalf 
of the cause of religion and inform the Pope and the 
Legates on all points ; as regarded Piacenza he had come 
to no decision, but he would not fail to take the measures 
proper to the occasion. To this concise and general 
statement the Legate replied: "Since your Majesty has 
not yet come to any decision on this subject, I beg 
permission to request that the decision may be come to 
in such a way that it may be not only salutary but 

Immediately after the Legate, Sforza Pallavicini had an 

* See Sfondrato's letter of Oct. 2, 1547, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 131 seq. 


audience. Yet even he received the same colourless 
answers, but with this difference, that the Emperor re- 
marked at the close that he did not wish misunderstandings 
to arise between him and the Pope over Piacenza, and that 
he would show his favour towards Ottavio Farnese. The 
spark of hope which this expression had kindled in the 
Legate and Pallavicini was very soon extinguished in 
both by a declaration made by Granvelle.^ 

The same devices which had been employed at Augsburg 
were also employed at Rome by Mendoza towards the 
Pope and Cardinal Farnese with the same unsuccessful 
results.'^ What else could have been expected when it 
was already known at the Papal court on the 17th of 
September that Ferrante Gonzaga had threatened Count 
Santafiora and Sforza Pallavicini with the Emperor's 
displeasure if they continued to protect Parma ? ^ 

Even if the Imperialists subsequently abstained from 

* See Sf>?rza Pallavicini's letter of Oct. 3, 1547, ibid.^ 134, n. i ; here 
(137, n. 4) also in an Italian translation is Granvelle's Spanish docu- 
ment handed to the Legates and already cited by Pallavicini (1. 10, 
c. 5, n. 10). 

2 Cf. Mendoza's reports in Dollinger, Beitrage, I., 119 seq., 121, 
126. For Diego Hurtado de Mendoza as statesman, humanist, and 
poet, see Graux, Orig. du fonds grec de I'Escurial, Paris, 1880, 163 
seq. ; Fesenmaier, Diego Hurtado de Mendoza (Progr.), Munich, 
1881-1882, 1883-1884; Histor. Zeitschr., XXXIX., 404 seq. ; Have- 
MANN, Darstellungen aus der Gesch. Spaniens, Gottingen, 1850, 311 ; 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., xv seq. ; Ehses in Histor. Jahrb., XXIX., 677. 
The extracts from Mendoza's letters made by the partisan writer 
Aymon (Maximes politiques du Pape Paul III., La Haye, 1716), 
from a codex in the Library of the Escurial, are so fragmentary and 
arranged with such a polemical intention that they are of no use 
for historical purposes. 

^ See B. Ruggieri's report of Sept. 17, 1547 (copy in BaLAN is 
inaccurate, VI., 396), now authentically reproduced in Nuntiatur- 
berichte, X., 522, n. I. 


vexing Parma, they yet took no steps to punish the 
murderers of Pier Luigi and to surrender Piacenza as 
Paul III. demanded.^ The crime of the loth of September 
was to be turned to the fullest account. The surrender 
of Piacenza on the guarantee of compensation was held 
out as an enticement by the Imperialists to bend the 
Pope to submission to their master's policy. Paul III. 
saw through the scheme, and now at last made plain 
his unmistakable disinclination to give way on the question 
of the Council.^ 

The Pope's inordinate love for his own offspring may 
have given the Imperialists some hope that the agitation 
and horror caused by the recent occurrences would put an 
end to a life now numbering eighty years; but the iron 
disposition of Paul III. was proof even against such a 
shock as this,^ and henceforward his conduct gained in 
dignity. " In his relation to the Emperor he appears as 
the one who has received injury, and the sympathies of 
men are turned to him and withdrawn from the cold state- 
craft of his adversary." * 

Next to the Pope, Cardinal Farnese was the most cruelly 
stricken. In his first moment of excitement he exclaimed : 
" If Piacenza is not given back, then will I help myself, as 
best I can, even if I have to summon hell to aid me." 

* See the brief of Sept. 20, 1547, in Raynaldus, 1547, n. no, 
and Nuntiaturberichte, X., 116, n. i, where there is fuller informa- 
tion about Mignanelli's mission; see also Spicil. Vat., I., 75 seq.\ 
FONTANA, II., 502 seq. 

2 Already on Sept. 26, 1547, Mendoza had reported that the Pope 
had spoken of ordering a session to be held in Bologna (see 
DOLLINGER, Beitrage, I., 123). 

' He told the Venetian ambassador that he hoped to outlive the 
Emperor (see de Leva, IV., 377, n. i). 

* FriedenSBURG in Nuntiaturberichte, X., xxxviii ; cf, CampaNA. 


Later he threatened to deliver over Parma to the French.* 
Such utterances were intended to alarm the Imperialists, 
but at bottom Farnese hoped against hope that the Emperor 
would have the sense to give back his booty under certain 
precautionary measures and place Ottavio, his son-in-law, 
once more in possession of Piacenza. Mendoza tried to 
foster these vain hopes by showing a letter from Granvelle. 
Even after the disappointment caused by Figueroa's silence 
on the restoration of Piacenza, Farnese was of opinion that 
the Emperor, in view of the ferment in Germany and Italy 
and the threatening attitude of France, would not push 
things to extremities.^ 

The Pope also did not yet wish to bar a way of return 
to the Emperor. When Paul III. in the middle of October 
addressed a consistory on the murder of Pier Luigi, he 
declared that Ferrante Gonzaga was certainly the murderer, 
but he hoped that the crime had been committed unknown 
to Charles V. and that his Majesty would restore Piacenza 
to the Church, with which object Mignanelli had been 
sent to Augsburg. He cherished a distinct hope that 
the Emperor would fulfil this just expectation and not 
make himself a participator in wrongdoing. Even if, the 
Pope went on to declare, he were willing to forgive the 
injuries he had suffered as a man, leaving it to God to 
inflict punishment on the sinner, he could not tolerate and 
forget the acts of iniquity and robbery perpetrated against 
the Papacy and the Church, but must visit them with 
chastisement even if in doing so he should die a martyr's 

» See Mendoza's report in DOLLINGER, Beitrage, I., 124, 129. 

2 Q^ DE Leva, IV., 374 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 142 seq. 

3 Of the consistory, which is not mentioned in the *Acta Consist. 
(Consistorial Archives of the Vatican), nothing was known except from 
the extract given by RiBlER (II., 61), from a despatch of the French 


In reality Paul III. believed that since the murder of 
September the loth everything w^as to be feared from the 
Imperialists.^ The fate of Clement VII., in which he had 
shared, rose before his eyes in vivid colours; after losing 
Piacenza, he observed, he had no vv^ish to lose Rome also.^ 
Measures of security were ordered to be taken without 
delay. While in Rome troops were collected together 
under pretext of danger from the side of the Colonna, 
secret negotiations were entered into with the ambassadors 
of Venice and France.^ Henry II., on hearing the news 
of Pier Luigi's murder, had at once held out hopes of 
assistance to the Pope.* Du Mortier, hitherto French 
ambassador in Rome, was recalled and replaced by 
Frangois de Rohan.^ In the last week of October came 
also Charles de Guise, appointed Cardinal on the 27th of 
July, ostensibly to receive the red hat,^ but really in order 

ambassador in Venice, with the obviously incorrect date, Sept. 17. 
We are indebted to Friedensburg for further information by his publica- 
tion of Mendoza's Spanish report of Oct. 16 in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 579 seq. 

1 "Who," observes Bezold pertinently (p. 803), "could any longer 
feel safe in the presence of a power which could stoop to employ such 

2 See Mendoza's letter of Sept. 20, 1547, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 570. 

3 Cf. DoLLiNGER, I., 113, 116 seq., 119 seq., 121, 124, 126, 129; 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 570, 572, 574. 

* See Dandino's *letter to Cardinal Farnese, dat. Fontainebleau, 1547, 
Sept. 17 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

^ His instructions (without date) in Ribier, II., 39 seq. The 
*Acta consist, cancell. give Oct. 6, 1547, as the date of the consistory 
in which Rohan was received to do homage for Henry II. (Consistorial 
Archives of the Vatican) ; see the *declaration of obedience in Var. 
Polit, 46, f. 157b seq. (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

^ The hat was given at last on Oct. 24, 1547 (see Acta consist. 
cancel!., Consistorial Archives of the Vatican). 


to negotiate about an alliance by means of which Paul 
III. hoped to be backed up by France.^ 

Guise, an ardent French partisan, once more set before the 
Pope in glowing colours the shamelessness of the Emperor's 
conduct: the murder of Pier Luigi by hired bravos, the 
forcible occupation of a city which Charles himself had 
bestowed on the Holy See in requital for the help given 
to him by Papal forces to conquer the Duchy of Milan, 
and finally, the refusah to restore it to the legitimate 
successor of the murdered prince and his own son-in-law, 
who had served him in the war with the happiest success. 
All the pent-up anger of the Pope, which in Mendoza's 
presence he had wisely curbed, now broke out afresh. All 
that he had done for the Emperor, especially by his parti- 
cipation in the Schmalkaldic war, he now rued bitterly. 
He could forgive his predecessors Leo X. and Clement 
Vn. for the favours shown to them by Charles V., but not 
himself. From henceforth he was determined to renew 
in perpetuity the alliance with France which, as the 
course of history proved, had always been advantageous 
to the Holy See. He hoped that he might live long 
enough to see his friendship with the French King set 
upon a firm basis, his own family bound to him by 
indissoluble ties, and he himself an agent in raising Henry 
n. to be one of the most powerful princes in the world.^ 

The danger from the Emperor's side seemed so great to 
Paul HI. that he forgot everything else. The warlike pre- 
parations which Charles V. was making in Germany and Italy 
caused alarm in Rome lest he should carry out the acjvice^ 

* For Guise's negotiations, see RiBiER, II., 71 seq. ; DE Leva. IV., 
376 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 168, n. i. 

2 See Guise's report of Oct. 31, 1547, in RiBlER, II, 74, 75. 

^ For the period of Clement VII., see our statements in Vol. IX. 
of this work, 453 seqq. During that of Paul III., Charles's chief 


SO often given him by his statesmen and the enemies of 
the Farnesi and invade the Papal States, already wedged 
in on the north and south, and confine the Pope within the 
limits of his ecclesiastical office. Rumours were already 
afloat of an armed expedition against Rome like that 
led in 1527 by Frundsberg and Bourbon.^ No proof 
was forthcoming that Charles had formed any such plan, 
but, on the other hand, it is certain that Ferrante Gonzaga, 
in anticipation of a conjunction between France and the 
Pope, had made proposals of a similar kind. Gonzaga 
himself wished to seize Parma, Cosimo de' Medici, with 
the help of Rodolfo Baglioni, was to operate against 
Perugia, while Ascanio Colonna attacked Rome on the 

Against such a danger Paul III. thought of securing 
himself by a defensive alliance with France, Venice, 
Urbino, and Switzerland. This combination was to form 
" the door for offensive operations,"^ and to free Italy from 
the Spanish yoke.* The Pope in his alarm looked on all 
sides for support : he even appealed to his mortal enemy 
Cosimo de' Medici,^ and naturally appealed in vain. Far- 
reaching schemes were concocted. In Italy, Milan, Genoa, 

counsellors were Cardinal Accolti {ca. 1542; see Desjardins, III., 
25 seq\ Mendoza, 1543 (de Leva, IV., 479, n. 4), and Burlamachi 
(see ibid., 234, n. 3; Cantu, Eretici, II., 476). 

1 C/ Henne, VIII., 315 ; BROSCHin theMitteil. des osterr. Instituts, 
XXIII., 144. For Charles V.'s ascendency in Italy, see Fiedler, 
Relationen, 58 seq., 65 seq. 

2 See Gonzaga's letters of Nov. 4 and 7, 1547, in Maurenbrecher, 

3 Cf. RiBiER, II., 75 seq., 81 ; Brosch, loc. cit. For the slender 
relationships between Paul III. and the Swiss, see Archiv fiir schweiz. 
Gesch., XIII., 272 seq., and WiRZ, Filonardi, 98 seq, 

* Cf. Campana, 417. 

• See Lupo Gentile, 121. 

VOL. XIL 25 


and Naples were to be wrested from the Emperor; for 
the undertaking against Naples the assistance of the 
numerous refugees was counted upon before all else, and 
even the services of the ruler of Algiers and of the Sultan 
were taken into calculation.^ 

With regard to Genoa, Spinola negotiated with Cardinals 
du Bellay and Guise ; Giulio Cibo, who had been already 
implicated in the Fiesco conspiracy, came at this time to 
Rome.2 As the secret of both plots was divulged, it 
may well be surmised that they were only intended to 
intimidate the Emperor.^ Besides, the Pope, despite his 
great indignation, was far from intending to fling himself 
there and then into the arms of the French King. Only 
when Venice also entered into the compact would Paul III. 
bind himself to the league with France.* Henry II., on 
his side, had many considerations to bring forward against 
the draft of the Franco- Papal treaty, which Cardinal Guise 
had transmitted to him on the lOth of November 1547.^ 
On neither side was a conclusion arrived at ; for the time 
being everything was in suspense. 

In the meantime Charles V., surrounded by Spanish 
and Italian troops, had opened at Augsburg on the ist of 
September 1547 the Diet to which the epithet "armed" 
was given. All the seven Electors and almost all the 
temporal and ecclesiastical princes were present, and the 

1 See RIBIER, II., 81 ; Druffel, Beitrage, I., 81 ; Nuntiatur- 
berichte, X., 571, 575. In the beginning of 1548 Paul III. even put 
out diplomatic approaches to the Sultan ; but nothing more is known 
(see BrOSCH, loc. cit, 146 seq.). 

2 See Druffel, Beitrage, I., 73, 74 ; cj. Atti d. Soc. Ligur., VIII., 
Docum., 136; F. MUSETTINI, Ricciarda Malaspina e Giulio Cib6, 
Modena, 1864 ; DE Leva, IV., 379 seq. 

3 DE Leva, IV., 382. 
* Cf. Campana, 411. 

^ See Druffel, Beitrage, I., 80, 84 seq., 86. 


Venetian envoy observed with astonishment the "un- 
bounded reverence " displayed towards the Emperor.^ 

To those who looked only on the surface, Charles 
certainly appeared to stand on the pinnacle of his 
authority, but he did not fail to perceive that a com- 
plete subjection of the Protestant Estates as a whole 
was out of the question. The northern portions of the 
Empire were as good as untouched by the events which 
had just come to pass ; but in the rest of Germany also 
the situation seemed so difficult that the Emperor felt 
that he had not the means in his possession to carry 
out his wishes by force. ^ The circumstance that the 
Emperor had already been confronted by a confederation 
of numerous Protestant Estates was charged with weighty 

In securing the neutrality of Duke Maurice of Saxony, 
concessions, on matters of religion, contrary to the stipula- 
tions of the treaty concluded with the Pope, had been 
made which flung over the authority of the Tridentine 
Council. In renewed violation of the above-mentioned 
agreement, Charles, in his treaties with the conquered 
Estates, had not made recognition of the Council one of 
his conditions, but only submission to the ordinanx:es of 
the Diet. To the Estates he had given the express 

* Fiedler, Relationen, 146. 

2 Wolf, Interim, 44. As to the possibility of restoring the Church 
throughout the Empire by force, contemporary opinion was already 
divided. Among modern historians also the most opposite views are 
still held on this point. K. A. Menzel(III., 282) is of opinion that 
forcible measures on behalf of the ancient Church would, humanly 
speaking, have brought about the same results in Germany that 
Ferdinand I. had achieved in Bohemia and Austria. Maurenbrecher 
(p. 175) goes further, but overlooks entirely the hindrances which lay 
in the dissatisfaction of Bavaria and in the separate treaties which 
Charles entered into with the Protestant States. 


assurance that they would be permitted to continue in 
their reh'gion as before, and that no compulsory change 
would be forced upon them.^ If, therefore, there were 
expectations among many that the victor in the Schmal- 
kaldic war would take vigorous measures for the restoration 
of the Catholic Church in Germany, the fact was over- 
looked that the victor himself had already barred the way 
to any decisive policy of this sort. 

The situation was still further complicated by the 
quarrel with the Pope over the Council, in regard to 
which the Emperor remained stubborn in his autocratic 
demand that the Fathers at Bologna should return with- 
out delay to Trent. Paul III. was ready to accede to 
this if the Emperor would give him assurances of the 
submission of the Protestants of Germany to the decrees 
of the Synod. Amid the great difficulties with which 
he was confronted, Charles V., looking upon the Council 
as if it were an Imperial Diet, seems to have contem- 
plated the possibility of a re-discussion and re-statement 
of the dogmatic decisions already registered.^ He com- 
pletely failed to see that this was beyond the power 
of any Pope to allow ; in theological matters Charles 
was somewhat at sea, and was also strongly biassed by 
his political advisers, who from the religious point of 
view were to some extent in favour of very questionable 

The critical nature of the situation explains the very 
moderate attitude taken by Charles at the beginning of the 
Diet of Augsburg. The proposition which he laid before 
the Estates on the ist of September 1547 reaffirmed, "as 
if there had been neither war nor victory," in relation to 
ecclesiastical as well as secular affairs, the utterances of 

' See supra, p. 327. 

• Cf, Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte, V., 6th ed., 3, 5 seq. 


previous Diets.^ The afifairs of religion were handled with 
striking brevity. Since the disruption in Germany, so ran 
the message, has been the root and chief cause of all the 
disturbance in the Empire, and without its removal no 
restoration of peace was possible and to attain this object 
the Council in Trent had been summoned, the first and 
principal subject of deliberation must be how to effect an 
agreement and, pending the success of such efforts, how 
to deal with questions of religion ; it would be the business 
of the Estates to submit proposals on this subject. 

No doubt could exist as to the object Charles V. had 
in view. He was as determined as ever to carry out his 
wishes in the matter of the Council, in spite of the Pope 
and the Fathers in Bologna. He was bent on exercising 
pressure on the latter to transfer the Synod once more 
to Trent through the initiative of the Diet, and in the 
case of this form of intimidation failing, to cover his 
retreat by an arbitrary interim regulation of religion 
carried by the unanimous vote of the Diet.^ He had 
taken steps preparatory to such an interim in August, 
before the opening of the assembly.^ This finely devised 
plan was frustrated by the refusal of the ecclesiastical 
princes to give an expression of opinion before Charles 
had expounded his intentions more clearly. The secular 
Electors also of the Palatinate, Saxony and Brandenburg, 
while disclaiming any intention of anticipating his 
Majesty, begged, all the same, that a "general, free 

» See Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 675. As many of the Pro- 
testant princes objected to a "Papist" as President of the Diet, 
Charles V. conferred this position not on Cardinal Truchsess but on 
the Archduke Maximilian (see Venet. Depeschen., II., 336). 

2 Wolf, Interim, 48. 

3 Referred to by FriedensbURG in Archiv fiir Ref.-Gesch., IV., 
213 seq. 


Christian council should be held at Trent or elsewhere 
in Germany" for the removal of erroneous doctrines and 
abuses, to the decisions of which Paul III. must submit. 
At this "free" council all bishops would have to abjure 
their oath to the Pope, a decisive vote be given to the 
Protestants, and the decrees already formulated at Trent 
be " reassumed," i.e. re-opened for discussion ! Even the 
College of princes, prelates, and counts, in which there 
was a Catholic majority, demanded this " reassumption," 
a proceeding in direct contradiction to the principles of 
the Church. The Estates of the Empire declared that 
the best way to remove the religious dissensions would 
be to summon a new religious conference or a national 
council in which God-fearing persons of all stations in 
life should have a voice in the decisions ! Regarding the 
Council of Trent, the Estates expressed their conviction 
that the Emperor would not take any steps towards its 
continuance, since that Synod " prematurely, without 
impartial hearing of the cause, had drawn up a medley 
of confessions and anathemas of doctrine on the most 
important articles under dispute, and from it nothing was 
to be looked for but trouble and injustice."* 

Opinions being thus divided, the Emperor interposed 
with a resolution of a very peculiar kind. In this docu- 
ment, dated the i8th of October,^ he declared, with a 
strange ignoring of contrary opinions, that he understood 
from the answer of the Estates, " in which he graciously 

1 Sastrow, II., 142 seq. ; cf. Menzel, III., 225 seq. ; Wolf, 49 seq. 

* Sastrow, II., 151 seq.-, Bucholtz, VI., 203; Beutel, 22 seq. 
Wolf (p. 51) remarks : "The idea of the Emperor was this, to obtain 
from the Protestants a declaration that they were ready to attend a 
council in a German city and to execute its decrees. Thereupon 
Charles, with this important concession in his hand, would, as executor 
of the proposals of the Estates, demand the reassembly of the Council 
at Trent." Cf. also Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 6, n. 4. 


acquiesced, that the discussion on disputed points of religion 
by the General Christian Council appointed to be held and 
duly opened at Trent, should there be continued," and he 
''undertook that they would submit themselves to such 
a General Council and obediently await and accept its 
determinations for themselves and their successors, and 
thus in that place follow the footsteps of the Holy Fathers 
and ancients who in matters of religion had ever had 
recourse to holy councils of the Church." The Emperor 
went on to invite the co-operation of his subjects, especially 
those of the lower orders, to help as far as possible in 
supporting the Council in its continuance at Trent so that 
the deliberations might run their course the sooner and 
with greater dignity. He also called upon all Christian 
potentates and nationalities, and especially the German 
archbishops, bishops, and prelates, to be present personally 
or by representatives, giving also an assurance that the 
upholders of the Augsburg Confession might appear also, 
with safe-conducts there and back and the right to be 
heard if necessary. All the transactions and decrees of 
the Synod should be godly and Christian, all party spirit 
set aside, all discussions and decisions regulated by Holy 
Scripture and patristic teaching, and also a serviceable 
and Christian reform established in matters ecclesiastical 
and secular and all erroneous teaching and abuses duly 
abolished. The prayer of the Estates that means should 
be contrived whereby, until the General Council gave its 
decisions, they might live on good terms one with another, 
the Emperor was willing to consider. 

Regardless of the objection of Sfrondato, the repre- 
sentative of the Pope, of whom not a single mention ^ 

' Sfondrato at once complained, when Granvelle on October 18 sub- 
mitted to him the Imperial resolution, that the promise of the reassembly 
at Trent was arbitrary, and dwelt especially on the absence of any 


had been made in the Emperor's document, the latter 
endeavoured to induce the Estates, by acceptance of this 
vague resolution, to entrust to him " the sole management 
of the affairs of the Council." He succeeded with the 
Electors and princes, although they only pledged them- 
selves thereby to a council which was to be held at once. 
The representatives of the towns withstood stubbornly all 
the endeavours of the Emperor's counsellors. Called before 
Charles V., they declared that it was not their province 
to overrule and improve on the opinion of the princes. 
At the same time they presented a declaration, which had 
been prepared some time before, demanding a free general 
Christian council not subject to Papal authority or a 
national council. The Emperor conveyed to them in reply 
that it was most acceptable to him that, following the 
example set by the higher Estates, they placed themselves 
entirely in his bands and were of the same mind as the rest ! 

mention of the Pope and of the Holy See. In reply he was told that 
the latter had been intentional in order to obviate difficulties from the 
Protestant side, and that even with this omission the authority of the 
Holy See was safeguarded by the express condition " according to the 
teaching of Scripture and of the Fathers." When Sfondrato further 
called attention to the lack of any definite pledge with regard to the 
restitution of Church property, he was silenced by the assurance that 
that lay within the intention of the Emperor but that it was impossible 
to do everything at once. Sfondrato finally pointed out the difficulties 
that might arise from the expression that the Council was in the first 
instance to be held at Trent. Granvelle was of opinion that no further 
alteration could be made, as the matter was now fully settled (see 
Sfondrato's letter of 21st October 1547 in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 
154 seq.\ cf. Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 6, n. 4, who here cites another letter 
from Sfondrato of 17th November 1547, belonging to this period, but 
no longer forthcoming). In the words "according to the teaching of 
Scripture and of the Fathers," Bucholtz (VI., 205) sees "the funda- 
mental preservation of the Papal rights if they are understood in the 
sense given them by the Church." Yes, if 1 


In this way an entirely different meaning was given to 
the declaration of the towns, for in reality they were not 
in agreement with the higher Estates at all. They only 
did not like to animadvert openly on their opinions of the 
latter in the presence of the Emperor. In order that this 
ambiguous behaviour might not be used against them in 
the future, they had set forth their true sentiments in the 
declaration before mentioned to which afterwards under all 
circumstances they could appeal.^ 

If the Emperor was satisfied with a "personal manage- 
ment " of the Council fenced about with provisions in this 
way, he was deceiving himself; for it was clear that the 
Protestants had never intended really to submit to the 
conciliar decrees, and that the towns made downright 
demands for a Council without the Pope, and such an one 
as should not be a continuation of the Synod of Trent.^ 
In no case was he justified in allowing Cardinal Madruzzo 
to declare to the Pope that the Electors, the ecclesiastical 
and temporal princes, as well as the towns, had submitted 

' Cf. Haberlin, I., 263, who remarks correctly that in the case 
under discussion one party wanted to circumvent the other (see also 
Beutel, 24 seq. ; WOLF, 52). One of the Nuremberg delegates at 
the Diet told Mocenigo in September that he did not understand how 
the Council could be general and free when the Pope granted a vote 
to prelates only and demanded from the Germans a recognition of the 
decrees hitherto passed in the Council without the concurrence of that 
nation (Venet. Depeschen., II., 340). Many towns did not agree with 
the negative attitude of their representatives. Thus the Council of 
Frankfort wrote on 3rd November 1547 to their envoy O. von Melem 
that they could not understand why their honourable city should 
repose so little confidence in the Emperor and thus act separately 
from the other Estates, and held strongly that since the Electors and 
princes had entrusted the matters of religion to the personal manage- 
ment of the Emperor, the towns should act in like manner (Reichstags- 
akten, LX., 44 ; State Archives, Frankfort). 

* Maurenbrecher'S opinion (Karl V., 1 76) 


themselves unconditionally to the Council assigned to 
Trent and there opened, and that on these grounds the 
Fathers assembled at Bologna ought to return to the 
former place.^ In order to give more force to a state- 
ment founded on an untruth the Emperor had already, 
without letting the Legates know, induced the German 
bishops, in a letter to the Pope, to describe in the most 
glowing colours the dangers and disadvantages arising 
to the Church from the translation of the Council to 
Bologna, and to demand the return of the Fathers of 
Bologna to Trent,^ 

Every means was to be used to browbeat the Pope into 
subjection to the Emperor's will. The despatch of the 
letter from the German episcopate, as well as Madruzzo's 
mission, was a continuation of the policy of terrorism which 
the murder of Pier Luigi had introduced. 

Cardinal Madruzzo at a critical moment in the year 
1546 had played the part of go-between for the Emperor 
with the Pope.^ At the same time it was difficult to 
understand how, on this occasion, he could allow himself 
to be made use of for services which were doomed before- 
hand to hopeless failure. The instructions given him were 
contrary to fact when they spoke of unconditional sub- 
mission on the part of all the Estates to the Tridentine 
Council, and made this a reason that the Emperor should 
demand a speedy return of the Council to Trent, and that 
too under threats of a protest if the Pope were to refuse 
his consent. 

Sfondrato was right in his immediate surmise that by 

1 See Madruzzo's instructions of Nov. 10, 1547, in Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 441 seqq. 

2 The letter dated Sept. 14, 1547, in Raynaldus, 1547, n. 84 {cf, 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 119 ; Venet. Depeschen, II., 351 seq). 

* Cf. sufra^ pp. 287, 290 seg. 


the demand for a retranslation of the Council nothing else 
was intended than to put the Pope in the wrong in case of 
his refusal, and thereby to lead up to an independent course 
of action in religious affairs. The Legate, on hearing of 
Madruzzo's mission, insisted that the latter should also have 
the fullest instructions with regard to the incident of 
Piacenza. The Imperialists would not at first consent to 
this, and only with difficulty was permission obtained that 
Madruzzo might bring the matter up for general discussion 
in Rome.^ 

Madruzzo left Augsburg on the 6th of November 1547. 
His instructions were sent after him a few days later by 
special courier. In this document the Emperor begged that, 
besides complying with his principal request, the reopening 
of the Council in Trent, the Pope would send officials with 
full powers to set in order temporarily the religious affairs of 
Germany ; concerning the Papal election, the tranquillizing 
assurance was given that this, even during the assembly of 
the Council, would be vested in the Sacred College alone.^ 

On November the 23rd Madruzzo entered Rome, having 
been met by Mendoza, who had gone forward to accompany 
him and in accordance with the Emperor's wishes was to 
take part in the negotiations.^ Madruzzo alighted at the 
Vatican, and on the following day was received in private 
audience. He knew well how deeply offended Paul III. 
had been by the Emperor's behaviour in the matter of 
Piacenza, and therefore dealt first of all with this subject 
only, on which certainly he was not able to bring forward 
much of importance. In an audience in which Farnese 
and Mendoza took part, on the 25th of November, Madruzzo 

* Nuntiaturberichte, X., 178 seqq., 190. 

* See Nuntiaturberichte, X., 441 seqq. 

' See Charles V.'s letter of Nov. 10, 1547, in Maurenbrecher. 
124* seqq. 


stated his case as regards the Council, and presented a 
copy of his instructions. Their phraseology deceived no 
one, and it was at once recognized that they only dealt 
with the submission of the Protestants to the first Council 
that should be held. Nevertheless, no hurried steps were 
taken ; the Pope deferred his answer, as the opinion of the 
Cardinals had first to be taken,^ 

Paul III. had already, on the 6th of November, called 
Cardinal Cervini to Rome.^ Opinions were also asked from 
Sfondrato, del Monte, and the deputation of Cardinals 
for the Council. Sfondrato drew a vivid picture of the 
dangers, but dared not offer any advice. Cardinal del 
Monte was of opinion that the Emperor was trying to 
find a means of inculpating the Pope and Cardinals for 
waste of time, and of then assembling a Council himself. 
As the Tridentine Synod had removed its seat of its own 
accord to another place, it was not within the Emperor's 
competency to transfer it again at his fancy to another 
city without the approval of the Pope and the rest of the 
Christian princes. It was impossible, only to please the 
Protestants, because they demanded a Council in Trent, 
to do such a thing against the wish of the Fathers and 
against the wishes of a great number of Catholic princes. 
In addition Trent had at an earlier period been thought 
dangerous as a seat for the Council, and this was now still 
more the case since the events at Piacenza. From dislike 
of a suspension del Monte advised that the Council should 
carry out its work in Bologna. Still stronger, he thought, 
would the Pope's position be against the Emperor if the 
sittings were removed to Rome. The deputation of 
Cardinals, in consequence of the deaths of Sadoleto and 

* Cf. Farnese's letter in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 211, 212, 214 n. 

* Cervini left Bologna on Nov. 10 (see Massirelli, Diarium, IV., 
ed. Merkle, I., 717 segq.). 


Badia and the absence of Sfondrato and Morone, now 
consisted only of Guidiccioni, Crescenzi, and Pole, and were 
at first unable to agree. The strict Guidiccioni was in 
favour of the continuance of the Council in Bologna, 
while his two colleagues preferred a suspension. At last 
they drew up together a memorial recommending, with 
regard to the despatch of a plenipotentiary to the Pope, 
that the opinion of the Fathers at Bologna should be taken 
on the question of the Council and afterwards a final 
decision given.^ 

The Pope approved of this compromise. On the 9th 
of December 1547 he let Madruzzo be informed of it in 
consistory, but at his request no resolution was come to 
until Mendoza had been heard. The latter allowed It 
to transpire that he would deliver a protest against the 
continuance of the Council in Bologna. In reality, 
however, he confined himself to a demand made in con- 
sistory on the 14th of December, in forcible but very 
courteous tones, that the Synod should forthwith without 
delay return to Trent. He was informed that in the next 
consistory a reply would be communicated to him. After 
Mendoza and the other envoys had left the consistory 
it was decided that the matter should be laid before the 
Fathers of Bologna, which was done in a brief of the i6th 
of December.^ Madruzzo now despaired of any success 
for his mission, and avoided the conflict between his 

* Cf. Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 6-8 ; Le Plat, III., 662 seq. ; Beutel, 
31 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 212, n. 2. The memorial also insisted 
that Charles V. had obtained from the Protestants a promise of sub- 
mission only to a Council to be held {celebrando) at Trent. 

* See Farnese's letter in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 212, 213; cj. 
RaynaldUS, 1547, n. 90; here (n. 91) is also the brief of Dec. 16, 
which, according to Massarelli (Diarium IV,, ed. Merkle, I., 727), 
reached Bologna two days later (see also Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 8). 


position as Cardinal and that as representative of the 
Emperor by a hurried departure from Rome.^ 

In consequence the answer of the Council, to which 
Paul III. had left the decision, bearing date of the 20th of 
December, was presented to Mendoza in consistory on the 
27th of the same month. In this document, drawn up in 
accordance with del Monte's proposals, the Fathers at 
Bologna expressed their readiness to return to Trent if this 
could be done without general prejudice to the interests 
of Christendom. As a preliminary step to this it would 
first be necessary for those who had remained behind in 
disobedience in Trent to attend the legitimately constituted 
Council as a mark of their recognition, as was due, other- 
wise an evil precedent would be created. In the second 
place, since the submission of the German nation was 
promised only to a Council which was still to be held in 
Trent, it must previously be established beyond possibility 
of mistake that the decrees on doctrine hitherto published 
in accordance with Catholic teaching shall be recognized 

* He reached Trent by Dec. 23 ; he was expected at Augsburg on 
the Epiphany (see Sfondrato's letter in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 
220). The Bishop of Fano, P. Bertano, *wrote on Dec. 15, 1547, 
from Rome to the Duke of Camerino : "Parte questa mattina il s. 
Cardinale di Trento maHssimo sodisfatto et in grandissima rotta con 
costoro" (State Archives, Florence, Urb., 125, f. 204); ibid.^ 108, 
f. 703, a *letter of the Duke of Urbino to his mother, dat. Pesaro, 
Dec. 21, 1547, on Madruzzo's visit (hieri et questa notte) : "Dice che 
se ne torna con la guerra in pugno et che gh duole la ruvina d' Italia, 
la quale ha protestato et protesta per tutto et che senza dubbio fra 
quattro mesi al piu lungo saranno in Italia cento mila fanti et venta 
mila cavalli Thodeschi, i quali non potevano havere la miglior nova 
di questa et che ogni cosa andark a ferro e a fuoco, di che Dio per 
sua bonta tolga loro el potere in tutto et per tutto. Dice che la lega 
fra el papa e il re di Francia h al credere suo gia conclusa et che in 
ogni caso crede, che non vi sia piu disegno di accordo ; parte tanto 
mal satisfatto in ogni cosa, che non si potria aggiongervi." 


as immutable and not under any pretext whatever liable 
to fresh examination. In the third place, since a Council 
has been spoken of consisting of members drawn from all 
conditions of men, an assurance must be given that no new 
form of conciliar discussion is intended. Not less necessary 
is it, in the fourth place, that on the return of the Council 
to Trent both the whole assembly in general and each 
individual member thereof in particular shall have perfect 
freedom to remain at or to depart from that place. Fifthly 
and finally, the right of the majority of the Fathers to 
decide upon the translation and termination of the Council 
must be recognized.^ 

The conditions laid down by the Council touched the 
core of the matter and made the situation clear. Even the 
Emperor could not fail to see that the " personal manage- 
ment" of conciliar affairs did not signify that unconditional 
submission to the Tridentine Council, so successfully begun, 
which he had ordered Madruzzo to offer ; on the contrary, 
no one knew better than he that the Protestants had only 
been driven by the superiority of his armed power to 
consent to the " personal management" of this matter, and 
that under the general term of a free Christian Council the 
Protestants meant nothing else than what they had always 
declared before. In the same way he must also have been 
well aware that they had not the slightest intention of recog- 

1 See Raynaldus, 1547, n. 94, 95 ; cf. Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. 
Merkle, IV., 727 seq. ; Pallavicini, I. 10, c. 9, 10. By a brief of 
Jan. I, 1548, the ecclesiastical Estates of the Empire were also at last 
given an answer to their representations of Sept. 14, 1547 (see 
Raynaldus, 1548, n. 4-5 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 226 n. i). Farnese 
again impressed strongly on Sfondrato on Jan. 10, 1548, that there must 
be no room left for doubt that, unless the conditions, formulated by the 
Council and acknowledged by Charles himself to be justified, were 
carried out, there could be no further question of the return of the 
Synod to Trent (Nuntiaturberichte, X., 226 seq.). 


nizing the conciliar decrees already published on the Holy 
Scriptures, original sin, justification, and the Sacraments, 
whence it was that in their declarations they always spoke 
of a council to be held at Trent but not of the Council 
which had been in session there already. The removal of 
all these dangerous ambiguities was the more unpleasant 
to the Emperor since thereby the whole artificial fabric of 
his "personal management" of the Council by means of 
all Estates of the Empire fell tumbling to the ground ; but 
on this his demand for the retranslation of the Synod to 
Trent had been based ; since, moreover, the answer of the 
Council made it clear that, in the case of their suspicions 
not being removed within a suitable lapse of time, they 
would proceed with their deliberations, Charles V. felt 
that he must no longer delay the adoption of counter- 
measures. The dread of a schism would deter Pope and 
Council from proceedings such as would, he feared, prove 
the destruction of all his plans.^ 

Not for a moment did Charles accept the first of the 
conditions laid down by the Fathers at Bologna : that the 
Spanish prelates who had stayed behind in Trent must 
again unite with those in Bologna before the Council 
transferred its seat.^ In everything must the Pope and 
Council bend before his will. The protestation, that appeal 
to terror, which hitherto he had only used as a threat, he 
now brought into immediate execution.^ For this purpose 
he chose the most solemn form which he could find. Two of 
his officials, the attorney, Francesco Vargas, and the doctor 
of canon law, Velasco, who since the beginning of November 
1 547 had secretly held themselves in readiness in Bologna 

» See Pallavicini, 1. lo, c. ii. 

* This first condition, in BUCHOLTZ'S opinion (VI., 2io), might have 
been complied with undoubtedly by the Emperor. 

• Cf. Venet. Depeschen, II., 379 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 627. 


for any emergency, appeared on the i6th of January 
1548 in the general congregation of the Council, then 
engaged in discussing abuses of the Sacrament of penance, 
and demanded a hearing.^ This was granted, as was also 
the attendance of the notary and witnesses of the two 
Imperial procurators. In the plenary instructions which 
were shown to the notary of the Council it said that the 
Emperor, in the service of religion and in the interests of 
the Church, found himself under the necessity of protesting 
against certain persons who usurped the title of Apostolic 
Legates and against a convention in Bologna styling 
itself a Council. The Council met this attack by a 
declaration read aloud by the notary Claudio della Casa 
and repeated later on. In this counter-protestation the 
Council affirmed : Although the congregation sitting under 
the presidency of the Cardinal-Legate del Monte was 
under no obligation to hear procurators who had been sent 
to the Council as to an illegal convention, yet they 
would grant a hearing in order that it might not be said 
that it was not open to every man to present his case ; 
against all consequences of this permission granted to the 
procurators the Council would protect itself. By this 
declaration the audience of the Emperor's agents " was 
reduced to an almost insignificant act of courtesy and 
etiquette due to the Imperial Majesty." ^ 

Vargas in a distinct and audible voice then delivered an 
address in which, with avoidance of the prescribed titles 

'■ The text of the Bolognese protest of the Emperor in Raynaldus, 
1548, n. 6 seg. ; cf. Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. Merkle, I., 736 ; the 
letters addressed to Farnese by the Cardinal-Legate del Monte and 
the Archbishop Giov. Michele of Acerenza-Matera of Jan. 17, 1548, 
in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 451 seq., 453 seq. ; see also Pallavicini, 
1. 10, c. II. 

2 See Beutel, Interim, 37. 

VOL. XIL 26 


of the conciliar Fathers, he admonished the assembled 
bishops to take heed to that which he was about to 
announce in exact conformity with his Majesty's orders, 
and by their return to Trent to escape the inevitable ruin. 
As Vargas had begun with the words, " We are here as 
legally appointed plenipotentiaries of our Lord the Roman 
Emperor," so del Monte opened his reply by saying : " I 
also am here as Legate of the true and undoubted Pope 
Paul, the successor of St. Peter and Vicar of our Lord and 
Redeemer Jesus Christ. Here also are the Fathers of the 
General Council legally translated from Trent. We all 
beg the Emperor to change his mind, for on the troublers 
of a General Assembly of the Church, whatever position 
they may occupy, fall the heaviest penalties. Come what 
may, we shall not surrender the dignity of the Church and 
of the Council." 

Vargas hereupon presented the original Imperial man- 
date, dated Augsburg, August the 22nd, 1547, in protest to 
the secretary of the Council, Angelo MassarelH, who read 
the document aloud, whereat the promotor of the Council, 
Ercole Severoli, and Cardinal del Monte repeated their 
protest already mentioned. Vargas then recited the 
Emperor's long-winded protest. The incidents of an 
earlier date were enumerated in a very one-sided manner; 
the translation to Bologna was attacked as having taken 
place illegally at the instigation of a few prelates without 
leave being asked of Pope, Emperor, or princes, and the 
return to Trent demanded, the latter on the false ground 
that all Estates of the Empire had promised unconditional 
submission to the Council summoned to Trent. The 
answer made by the Fathers of Bologna to the Pope was 
described as ambiguous and treacherous and the right of 
their assembly to prescribe laws for Christian people on 
matters of faith and of reform disputed: still, most of the 


bishops present in Bologna were dependent upon the 
Pope's nod. This document, the tone of which towards 
the close increased in harshness, wound up with the 
significant declaration : " We declare aloud that our 
Emperor is ready to encounter the storm and tempest 
which he has feared and which he sees are about to break 
through your guilt and negligence and that of the Pope. 
The Church he will take zealously under his protection 
and do all he can that befits his right and office, his 
dignity and duty as Emperor and King, so far as the law 
permits and it has been established and observed by the 
laws, the doctrine of the Fathers, and the general consent 
of men." 

Foreseeing that the Imperial procurators would not 
appear again to receive a written answer to their protest, 
the President of the Council, Cardinal-Legate del Monte, 
determined to reply at once. The violent attacks of the 
Emperor had exasperated even him, yet his rejoinder, 
although severe, was dignified. He solemnly called God 
to witness that all the allegations of the procurators 
against the honour of himself and of his colleagues and 
against the validity and legality of the translation were 
untrue, wherefore he refrained from producing the authen- 
tic proofs. He as well as his colleagues were true and 
legitimate Legates of the Holy See. The Emperor was 
the son, and not the lord and master of the Church. He 
as well as the Fathers of the Synod would rather suffer 
death than allow the temporal power to oppress the 
Church and rob her of her freedom. 

The agitating proceedings which the Imperial procurators 
had brought about in this theatrical manner lasted from a 
quarter past two to a quarter past eight in the evening. 
The unruffled composure and firmness displayed by 
Cardinal del Monte on this occasion received the highest 


tribute of recognition even from his enemies,^ The same 
determination, however, was not shown by the majority of 
the Fathers. They inferred that the Emperor had been 
ill-informed because no mention had been made of the 
conditions on which the return to Trent depended.^ The 
written reply therefore finally took the form of a very 
mild protest. When it was taken for delivery to the 
procurators they had already left.^ Morone expressed 
his horror at the consequences which a breach between 
the Emperor and Pope must entail. Yet he had confidence 
that the Emperor was too wise and too high-minded to 
conjure up a strife the end of which no man could foresee.* 
Cardinal Cervini, who had returned to Bologna on the 23rd 
of January 1 548, spoke in favour of a suspension, as Morone 
did on the 26th of January. In agreement with him was 
del Monte, who considered suspension to be the lesser evil. 
At the same time they sent proposals as to the answer to 
be made to the protest which Mendoza had lodged at 

In vain did well-intentioned Cardinals in Rome try to 
prevent a repetition of the scene enacted in Bologna ; in 
vain the Pope attempted, to put off Mendoza's audience, 
but the latter would not draw back. On the 23rd of 
January 1 548, in a consistory before the Pope, Cardinals, 
and envoys, he declared ecclesiastical war in terms similar 
to those of the protest made at Bologna, subject to some 
necessary alterations. Notwithstanding all the accusa- 

* See Beutel, Interim, 38. 

* See in Appendix No. 35 Morone's letter of Jan. 23, 1548 (Vice- 
regal Archives, Innsbruck). 

' See Pallavicini, 1, 10, c. 11. 

■' See in Appendix No. 35 Morone's letter as above (Viceregal 
Archives, Innsbruck), 

* See letter from the conciliar Legates to Cardina Farncso in 
Nuntiaturbei'ichte, X., 455 seq. 


tions here raised against him, the sagacious Pope had 
sufficient self-mastery to abstain from an immediate 
reply. He wished to give an answer which should be 
the outcome of mature consideration, and invited Mendoza 
to attend a consistory on the ist of February to receive 
his message.^ 

In the meantime, the proposals of the Legates at Bologna 
arrived. They advised, together with the suspension of the 
Council, the assumption by the Pope of the function of 
judge in the matter of the removal to Trent.^ In private 
consultation with Mendoza the proposal was also made that, 
instead of the transference of the Council, three Cardinal- 
Legates should be sent to Germany to arrange a temporary 
settlement of religious affairs. The Emperor's ambassador, 
in an audience of the Pope on the 2Sth of January, in 
which he made most violent reproaches, rejected this plan 
with the remark, " The Council first, the Legates after- 
wards." * 

* See Raynaldus, 1548, n. 18 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 242, n. 
I ; here (p. 628 seq.) additions to Mendoza's letter of Feb. 2, only 
incompletely given by Dollinger in Beitrage, L, 134 seqq. See also 
Vincenzo Parenzi's **letter, dat. Rome, Jan. 23, 1548 (State Archives, 
Lucca) ; D. Lasso's report of Jan. 28, 1548, in DRUFFEL, Beitrage, L, 
91 seq. ; Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 12 ; cf. also Bromato, IL, 140 seq., 
and especially Campana, 432. The Imperial protest was at once 
circulated in print : Allegatione o vero Pro || testa fatta per 1' illustriss. S. 
Don Diego || di Mendoza, Ambasciatore della Cesa || rea Maesta alia 
S. di N. S. Pap II a Pauolo III. sopra le cose || appartenente al Concilio 
IJ generate di Trento. With the Imperial privilege, "impresso in Milano 
per Messer Gotardo da Ponte che sta appresso la Doana ne 1548 adi 
3 Marzo," 10 sheets in small 4°. 

2 The letter of the conciliar Legates to Cardinal Farnese of Jan. 26, 
1548, with the proposals as to the reply to be made to Mendoza's 
protest, in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 455 seq., 459 ; cf. Massarelli, 
Diarium IV., ed. Merkle, I., 740. 

2 See Mendoza's letter of Feb. 2, 1548, cited supra, note i. 


The answer given to Mendoza in consistory on the ist 
of February 1548 to the protest of the 23rd of January was 
drawn up by Cardinal Pole with the utmost caution, tact, 
and wisdom, in order to avoid, as far as possible, the 
ultimate evil, a full and open rupture.^ With this object, 
the offensive protestation was treated as an act of 
Mendoza's in which he had exceeded his master's instruc- 
tions. Accordingly, the responsibility for the document 
was laid upon the ambassador, but even this in part in a 
very mitigated form. The latter, the reply began, could 
have no difficulty in forming an idea of the great grief 
felt by the Pope on receiving the protestation, as Mendoza 
himself apparently was not altogether a stranger to the 
same sentiments. The Pope, besides, could not believe 
that the Emperor intended to protest against the Pontiff's 
own person ; his protest was lodged against the Legates as 
the authors of the transference of the Council. If it was 
said of the Fathers at Bologna that they were under 
special obligations to the Pope, his Holiness could only say 
that, apart from the relations in which he stood as Chief 
Shepherd towards his flock, he acknowledged no particular 
party, nor had he, during the negotiations hitherto carried 
on, yet found the necessity of having any such party to 
rely upon ; on the contrary, he had urged upon the Legates 
as an express duty the maintenance of the freedom of the 
Council. As regards the complaint made of the answer 
sent in compliance with Madruzzo's proposal, the only 
rejoinder possible, until these general objections were more 
particularized, was that the strictest endeavour was made 
to adhere to the primitive usage of the Church, and also to 
the ordinances of the Emperor himself, provided the 

* See Raynaldus, 1548, n. 29 seq. ; QuiRlNl, Ep. Poll, IV., 382 
seq.\ Nuntiaturberichte, X., 244; Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 13 j BeuTEL, 
39 seq, ; Campana, 432 seq. 


following premisses were observed, that the dogmas already 
established could not be submitted to further examination, 
that private persons could not be accepted as judges, and 
that freedom of place and persons should be guaranteed. 

The answer then went on to make an important con- 
cession whereby Paul III. abandoned his previous stand- 
point that the Council at Bologna should decide on the 
matter of translation. Since in the protestation many 
reasons had been adduced to prove the invalidity and 
illegality of the transfer of the Council, reasons which 
equitably demanded examination, the Pope, out of love of 
unity in the Church, consented to arbitrate on this question. 
For this purpose four Cardinals from different nations, 
namely, du Bellay, Alvarez de Toledo, Crescenzi, and 
Pole, would have full powers to make inquiry into the 
legality of translation ; if their verdict was adverse, then 
the Pope would bring all his authority into play in order to 
bring about the return to Trent. In order that in the 
interval Germany might not suffer any disadvantage, his 
Holiness offered to send Legates or nuncios thither who 
should, for the time being, try to meet the most pressing 

This temperate as well as dignified reply of Paul III. 
shows plainly he wished to keep a way of escape open to 
Charles V. As an alliance with France and Venice was 
not to be reckoned upon as a certainty, it seemed necessary 
to temporize, however bitter the Pope's feelings were, especi- 
ally at the behaviour of Charles in the affairs of Piacenza.^ 

1 See Friedensburg in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., xliii ; cf. WOLF, 
Interim, 74 ; Campana, 423 seq. " Hora ciascuno sta in dubbio," 
*writes V. Parenzi on Feb. 3, 1548, from Rome, "di quelle sia per 
seguire. Poco bene si spera, ma si tiene che 1' arme non s' habbino 
da pigliar si presto." Another ^letter from the same of Feb. 5, 1548, 
is very pessimistic in tone : "D. Diegho partir^ presto per Siena et 


The endeavours to come to an understanding with 
Mendoza were fruitless, and he left Rome on the 15th of 
February.^ It was of greater importance that Paul III., 
in accordance with the opinion of the Cardinal-Legates, 
resolved, in order to prevent a schism, to order a suspension 
of the Council so that all synodal transactions hitherto 
carried on in the congregations came to an end.^ At the 
same time the preliminaries to a decision on the validity of 
the transfer of the Council were set on foot. On the i6th 
of February the Fathers at Bologna, and on the 25th those 
at Trent, were each directed to send at least three from 
their number in order that the Pope might give his 
decision after hearing the arguments on both sides.^ 

The Emperor in a Privy Council held on February the 
13th, 1 548, had confirmed Mendoza's protest. To the Pope's 
conciliatory and temperate reply of the ist of February 
he ordered an answer to be prepared.^ Nevertheless, he 
still shrank from the extreme step. For the present he 
was satisfied with the success of his policy of threats.^ 
The point of capital importance was that the Pope did 
not reject absolutely the scheme of organizing religious 
conditions in Germany on a temporary basis. On this 
object the Emperor's whole mind was bent. 

ii crede, avanti che parta, fark qualch' altro atto forse piu di mala 
sorte che la protesta" (State Archives, Lucca). 

* Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 14 ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 265, n. 4 ; 
DrUFFEL, Beitrage, I., 100. See also V. Parenzi's **report, dat. 
Rome, Feb. 18, 1548 (State Archives, Lucca). 

■^ See Knopfler in Wetzer und Welte, Kirchenlex., XL, 2d. ed., 
^ See Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 14 ; Massarelli, Diarium IV., of 
Feb. 25, 1548, ed. Merkle, L, 746. 

* See Sfondrato's report of Feb. 18, 1548, in the Nuntiatur- 
berichte, X., 253. 

* See ibid.^ xliii ; Beutel, 40 ; WOLF, 74. 


The Interim. — Last Days of Paul III. — His Death. 

Cardinal Madruzzo had reported to the Diet of Augs- 
burg on the 14th of January 1548 the unsuccessful results 
of his negotiations in Rome. In conjunction with this 
the Emperor brought forward his long-cherished plan^ of 
establishing, in virtue of his supreme authority in the 
Empire, with the co-operation of the Estates, a readjust- 
ment of ecclesiastical conditions in Germany which, 
pending the full reconciliation hoped for from the Council, 
and as a preparation for the same, should prove satis- 
factory to Protestants and Catholics alike. ^ 

The idea of such an agreement finds its earliest expres- 
sion incidentally in a letter of Charles V. of the 9th of 

^ A German version of Madruzzo's narrative and the Emperor's 
report in Sastrow, II., \-jqseq., ig% seq. ; cf. also Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 232, n. I. 

2 The view specially upheld by Ranke (Deutsche Gesch., V., 
6th ed., 32) and JanSSEN-PaSTOR (III., i8th ed., 679 seq.\ that 
Charles V. originally intended the Interim to be a general law of the 
Empire and not an exceptional measure binding on Protestants only, 
was first attacked by Maurenbrecher and afterwards by Beutel, 
Druffel, and others, but not on valid grounds (see WOLF, 84 seq., 
and also PoSTlNA, 96). While there is written contemporary evidence 
in favour of the opposite view, the Carmelite, Westhof, in his unpub- 
lished treatise on the Interreligio Imperialis of 1549, made use of 
by Janssen, says expressly that the Emperor wished, even if it were 
only for a time, to be the religious dictator for the Catholics. 



January 1547, in which he asked his brother Ferdinand I. 
to give liim advice concerning the measures to be employed 
in Germany. In his reply of the 19th of February the 
King of the Romans took up his brother's suggestion, 
and recommended in the first place the usual method of 
a Council, to be constituted, however, in such a way as to 
leave no door open for Protestant complaint; since it was 
very doubtful, if the Pope continued to act as he had 
hitherto done, that this object would be obtained, although 
a great deal of time would be spent on the negotiations, 
but in order to avoid further secessions, a temporary 
reorganization of religion or Christian reformation, which 
afterwards could be confirmed by the Pope and Council,^ 
must be established, on the basis of the earlier religious 
conferences, by theologians of mature experience. When 
Charles V. accepted this proposal he certainly was not 
thinking of founding a Germanic Church on the pattern 
of the Gallican. He only wished, by means of a religious 
compromise and the removal of abuses in the Church, 
to put an end to the internal dissensions which were 
crippling his Imperial authority.^ In a certain sense 
Charles was falling back on the earlier attempts at 
reunion, but with this difference, that on this occasion 
the formula of agreement was not to be drawn up by a 
conference, and was to be of a temporary character.^ 
The Emperor still recognized as clearly as ever that the 
religious controversy turned upon two entirely contra- 

* The important letters of the two Hapsburgs in Bucholtz, IX., 
403 seq., 407 seq. 

2 This is rightly insisted upon by Beutel (p. 11), Egelhaaf 
(11., 505), and Paulus in Katholik, 1894, II., 417 seq. 

^ The afifinity of the Interim with the earlier attempts at reunion is 
an argument that, as then, so now, the new formula of agreement was 
looked upon as binding on both parties. 


dictory systems which could not be harmonized by a 
" more " or " less." Charles hoped that his new expedient 
would create a state of things by which the gradual 
return of the Protestants to the Catholic Church would 
be rendered possible. 

Even if the Emperor's idea of restoring, in the flush of 
victory, the sorely needed religious peace to the Empire in 
such a way as this, sprang from the best intentions,^ yet 
the whole undertaking was already from the outset fore- 
doomed to failure from the lack of ecclesiastical authority. 
Charles had indeed declared in October 1547, when he 
appointed four theologians to discuss with his confessor 
Soto the management of religious affairs in Germany until 
the conciliar decision should have been pronounced, that 
the work of this commission was to be laid before the 
Pope,2 but this step was not taken. Even the request 
made through Madruzzo and Mendoza that the Pope 
should co-operate through plenipotentiaries in the Emperor's 
scheme of religious reorganization in Germany was not 
meant quite seriously.^ The Pope certainly could not 
altogether be left out of the question, since through him 
only was it possible to get the German bishops to take a 
part in carrying out the " Provisorium " ; but Paul III. was 
never permitted to exercise the decisive influence which 
as Head of the Church it was his prerogative to wield. 
The constant slights offered to Cardinal Sfondrato in the 
Diet, treatment of which he complains repeatedly in his 

* In July 1547 the Venetian envoy was informed that the Emperor 
had declared that he felt himself bound by duty to Christ, to whom he 
owed his victory, to settle the religious troubles of Germany (Venet. 
Depeschen, II., 318). 

* See Sfondrato's letter of Oct. 25, 1547, in Nuntiaturberichte, X., 

3 BeUTEL, 30. 


letters,^ above all, his total exclusion from any knowledge 
of the negotiations over the establishment of the Interim, 
show clearly that even a new plenipotentiary, to whose 
mission Paul III. was willing to consent, would have done 
no more than occupy a merely formal position.^ The 
Cardinal-Legate, Sfondrato, it is true, at once expressed 
his astonishment when Charles V. communicated his plan 
to the Estates that no representative of the Pope should 
have been consulted on the establishment of a new system 
of religious organization.^ 

Charles V. himself was conscious of the risks he was 
running in setting up his " Imperial Interim religion." He 
therefore tried to acquit himself by throwing the responsi- 
bility of its inception on the Diet. The consideration had 
also certainly great weight with him that success would only 
then be possible when he had with him the active partici- 
pation of the Estates in the scheme.* It was therefore 
extremely displeasing to the Emperor when the ecclesi- 
astical Electors refused to pronounce sentence on dogmatic 
questions which belonged to the Papal and conciliar 
tribunal. But many Protestants also had great objections 
to the scheme from distrust of the Emperor's Spanish 
theologians. Charles V. found himself in consequence 
obliged at last to form a committee of sixteen persons to 
deliberate on the means of securing Christian unity .^ Their 
consultations brought a fresh disappointment to the head 
of the Empire; careful as he had been to choose the 
members so as to represent as nearly as possible all classes 
in the Estates, the upshot of the commission was that they 

» Cf. Druffel, Beitrage, III., 63 seq. 

* See Beutel, 30. 

* Sfondrato's letter of Jan. 16, 1548, and Nuntiaturberichte, X., 236. 

* Wolf, Interim, 51. 

6 Pkutel, 45 ; Wolf, 57 ; cf. Venet. Depeschen, II., 394-396- 


were able to agree only on one point : that a removal of 
the religious dissensions was necessary!^ 

The Emperor's attempt to shift the responsibility on 
to other men's shoulders having failed, no other course 
remained open to him save that of an arbitrary exercise of 
power.2 The formula which was to be the instrument for 
realizing his schemes was fashioned with such secrecy 
that up to this day the most various opinions prevail as to 
the origin of the Interim. The first draft was from the pen 
of Julius Pflug, the follower of Erasmus, who hoped by yet 
further concessions to win over the Protestants. Other 
hands taking part in the work were those, on the Catholic 
side, of Michael Helding, Suffragan-Bishop of Mayence, 
the Carmelite, Eberhard Billick, and the Spanish theo- 
logians Soto and Malvenda ; while on the Protestant side 
John Agricola, the conceited court preacher of Joachim of 
Brandenburg, took part in the composition of the formula 
which was to work the miracle of healing the religious 
breach which for a generation had been rending the 
Empire in twain. Many as the alterations were in the 
original draft, the main outlines of the ground-plan 
remained plainly visible.^ 

The Interim, or " Declaration of his Roman Imperial 
Majesty on the observance of religion within the Holy 
Empire until the decision of the General Council," consists 
of six-and-twenty chapters, the dogmatic statements of 
which are drawn up almost entirely in the Catholic sense 
but always in the mildest and often vaguest terms. Where 

* Cf. Pastor, Reunionsbestrebungen, 352 seq. ; Beutel, 45 seq. : 
Wolf, 59. 

2 Wolf, 61 

' Cf. Pastor, cip. cit, 357 seq.', BfiUTEL, 60 seqq., 74 seq.; Histor. 
Zeitschr., LXII., 326 seq. For the co-operation of Billick, see 


it could be done without detriment to dogma the form and 
statements approach very near to the Protestant standard, 
but fundamentally the definitions are mostly Catholic. 
On the seven Sacraments, the worship of Mary and the 
saints, monastic vows, fasts, and finally on the Pope and 
the episcopate, the Catholic doctrine is advanced. The 
doctrine of purgatory was passed over, and the definition 
of justification was wanting in the requisite precision ; 
this was all the more suspicious as the Tridentine Council 
had already formulated the Catholic teaching on this 
crucial question. Although Charles had acknowledged 
in February 1547 this definition to be "most Catholic and 
holy," he now, in his zeal for the removal of the religious 
troubles, accepted in the " Interim," without regard for the 
authority of the Council, the discrepant formula of the 
mediatizing theologians. 

Even the doctrine of the Mass, out of consideration 
for Protestant opinion, was represented in terms wanting 
in definiteness and precision. Still more unfortunate 
was the employment of expressions of such ambiguity 
on many articles that both parties were able to claim 
the statement of doctrine as favourable to their own 
particular view. The ceremonial of the Sacraments was 
left untouched. In every town and church possessing 
its own priests two Masses at least were to be said daily, 
and in the villages one was to be said on high festivals. 
The altars, vestments, vessels, banners, crosses, pictures, 
and images were to remain in the churches. Also the 
principal feasts, including Corpus Christi, the days of the 
Holy Virgin, of the Apostles and Saints, All Saints, and the 
patronal festivals of individual churches were to be more 
widely celebrated, Fridays and Saturdays kept as fasts, 
and the customary fast-days observed. 

In order to facilitate for the Protestants entrance into the 


old Church,jvhich the Interim was to bring about, two im- 
portant concessions were made : the marriage of the clergy 
and communion under both kinds, but only provisionally 
until the Council made known its decision. Tacit assent 
was given to the possession of appropriated Church property. 
Introductory to the official acceptance of the Interim, 
which was finished in its entirety on the 12th of March 
1548,^ the Emperor entered into private negotiations with 
each Estate. The Electors Palatine and of Brandenburg 
were easily won, the latter having attempted for some 
time to take up a middle position between the old doctrine 
and the new. Maurice of Saxony was more difficult 
to handle, although he was at last invested on the 
24th of February with the Electorate taken away from 
John Frederick. Personally, Maurice declared that he 
was indeed ready to accept a clearly expressed resolution 
of the Diet, but refused to bind himself to obligations 
without previous consultation with his theologians and his 
Estates. He could on this point call attention to the 
fact that previous to the Schmalkaldic wars he had, with 
the Emperor's knowledge and at his wish, given his subjects 
assurances regarding the maintenance of their religion. In 
spite of all his persuasions Charles only succeeded in 
coming to a feeble compromise which secured to the crafty 
Maurice his freedom from obligations. The other Pro- 
testant confederates of the Emperor, the Margrave Hans 
of Brandenburg-Ciistrin, as well as the representative of 
Strasburg, resolutely opposed, in the face of all expostula- 
tions, the acceptance of the Interim. On the other hand, 
Nuremberg, Ulm, and Augsburg gave in their adhesion.^ 

* This hitherto unknown date is supplied by a letter from Billick 
(POSTINA, 96). 

2 Cf. Ranke, v., 6th ed., 32 seq. ; VI., 2nd ed., 264 seq., 276 seq. j 
PastoRj Reunionsbestrebungen, 370 scq.^ and particularly WOLF, 66seg^ 


The strongest opposition to the Interim came from the 
Cathoh'c Estates. Ecclesiastics as well as laymen were 
not willing that the Emperor, although only temporarily, 
should arrogate to himself the position of religious arbi- 
trator for Catholics and attribute to the temporal power 
instead of to the infallible Church the determination of 
matters of faith.^ The Catholic Estates were so far 
perfectly independent in their action that no Roman 
instigation could be proved. On the contrary, Bavaria 
had fanned and led this opposition far less from motives 
of Catholic zeal than from those of political rivalry. None 
save the Pope and the Council, declared the ecclesiastical 
Electors, had the right to consent to or to dispense and 
tolerate changes in respect of clerical marriage and com- 
munion under both kinds.^ 

Still more pointed was the protest of the Catholic 
princes and Estates, in the composition of which the 
Bavarian chancellor Eck had an important share. The 
Emperor was here made to understand in unmistakable 
terms that he was overstepping his authority when he 
presumed to handle definitions of doctrine which had been 
committed already to the Council ; it was to be feared 
that general confusion, if not obstruction, to the Council 
would result. Let Charles use his influence with the 
Protestant Estates to make them repudiate their doctrines, 
those even of the Augsburg Confession, according to 
which they never lived. The concessions with regard 
to marriage and communion under both kinds were 
not permissible; both might be tolerated at the utmost 
in Protestant Estates until the Council gave its decision, 
but neither could be expressly permitted — no, not even 
by the Pope ! Finally, there must be restitution of Church 

^ See Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 685 seg. 
' Sastrow, II., ^20 seg. 


property, free exercise of religion for those who had 
remained Catholic in a Protestant district, and absolute 
prohibition of innovations in districts that were already 
Catholic.^ The Emperor refused to accept the protest of 
the princes, and used language of unprecedented harshness 
towards Eck, the Bavarian chancellor, whom he spoke of 
as "Judas," just as at a later date he simply expelled the 
Jesuit Bobadilla for having preached against the Interim 
in Augsburg.2 

A remarkable concession on the part of Charles broke 
down the opposition of the Catholic princes. The latter 
finally determined, through their Council, to associate 
themselves with the milder remonstrance of the ecclesi- 
astical Electors after having received the assurance that 
the Interim did not apply to Catholics, but had been 
arranged by the Emperor with no other intention than to 
draw the Protestant Estates once more to the Catholic 
religion with a view to their final submission.^ 

The motive for this important surrender was probably 
the fear felt by the Imperialists that the Pope might 
form an alliance with the Catholic princes of Germany in 
order to make common cause against the Interim.* This 
explains the startling fact that Charles, with all his 
Catholic orthodoxy, obstinately debarred the spiritual 
head of Christendom from taking a part in negotiations 
which vitally affected the highest interests of religion. 
He evidently thought that when his great effort was 
crowned with success the Pope and the Council, for good 
or for evil, would be compelled to give their consent. 

1 Druffel, Beitrage, III., 98; cf. Pastor, Reunionsbestre- 
bungen, 383. 

2 Cf. BUCHOLTZ, VI., 240 seq.\ RiEZLER, IV., 399; cf. supra, 
p. 109. 

« Cf. BuciiOTTz, VI., 235. * Wolf, 75, 

VOL. XIL 27 


The Emperor's love of arbitrary procedure in matters 
of religion was exemplified afresh by his behaviour in the 
question of the Council. At an earlier date he had pressed 
the Pope to come to a decision on the subject of the 
transference of the Council; now, when Paul III. seemed 
prepared to comply, and had summoned witnesses from 
Trent, the Emperor forbade the latter to obey the injunc- 
tions of their highest ecclesiastical ruler.^ Nothing could 
be more characteristic of the Imperialist pretensions than 
the experience of Giuliano Ardinghello, who was sent by 
Cardinal Farnese, in agreement with the Pope, to Germany 
on matters connected with the Council. On reaching 
Augsburg on the 13th of March 1548 he found that the 
Emperor's representative claimed to lay down for the 
Papal plenipotentiaries the limits of their ecclesiastical 

It was therefore no matter for surprise when, at the 
end of April, on the receipt of the text of the Interim, 
for presentation to the Pope, Cardinal Sfondrato was 
apprised that this did not mean that the Pontiff's opinion 
thereon was invited, but simply that he was put in 
cognizance of its contents.^ Sfondrato on this occasion 
certainly did not delay in representing to the Emperor 

* FriedensburG in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., xliii, n. 2. For the 
courteous but flat refusal of the Tridentine Fathers, dat. March 23, 
1548, see Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 15, n. 3. Out of consideration for 
the Emperor the Pope temporarily withheld his decision on the 
question of the translation. 

2 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, X., xliii-xliv, 277, 287 ; ibid.^ 470 seq. ; 
see the instruction for Ardinghello, dated March 5, 1548, according 
to which Paul III. was ready to agree to the postponement, as desired 
by Charles V., of the judicial inquiry into the validity of the trans- 
lation and to the sending of Legates or nuncios into Germany. 

3 Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, X., 295 ; PALLAVICINI, 1. 10, c. 17 ; JANSSEN- 
Pastor, III., iSthed., 688. 


that although the Interim formed no binding rule of faith, 
the promulgation of which was not within his Majesty's 
competence, but only a provisional permissive enactment, 
yet it must be taken into consideration that the draft in 
many places was so badly and ambiguously worded as to 
give the impression that what was aimed at was uniformity 
of words rather than unity of faith. Thus in the Interim 
the marriage of the clergy was conceded which, although 
forbidden by ecclesiastical and not by Divine law, could 
not be sanctioned by the temporal power, all the less 
so since the prohibition of marriage to those who have 
received priests' orders rests on an unbroken Apostolic 
tradition; further, the permission in the Interim to com- 
municate the laity with the chalice was contrary to the 
decisions of many Councils. However that might be, he, 
Sfondrato, did not hold himself justified in pronouncing 
a verdict on matters of such grave importance. He would 
much rather await the sentence of the Pope and his special 

Charles had not the remotest intention of so doing. 
Urged by his political counsellors, and full of impatience 
to bring the religious reconciliation into being without 
delay, he believed that he would satisfy his conscience 
and the Catholic party if he made some alterations in the 
objectionable clauses of the Interim ; provided, indeed, that 
such alterations would find favour with the Protestants. 

From the Pope, Charles only looked with fear for 
hindrances to his intentions. His distrust was deepened 
by the prevalent belief in Augsburg that Paul III. was in 
alliance with France. It was also characteristic of the 
temper then reigning in the Emperor's court that Savo- 
narola's sermons were largely read.^ Suspicion and 
aversion increased on the journey of Prospero Santr 

^ Cf. Nuntiaturberichte, X., 277 seq.^ 297 n. 


Croce,^ appointed nuncio to King Ferdinand, which was 
long protracted. The worst surmises were indulged in as 
to the Pope's dependence upon France. The fear of inter- 
ference on the part of the French Government seemed not 
unfounded, since that body was as determined as ever to 
prevent Paul III. from coming to terms with the Emperor. 
A breach between the two would at once drive the Pope 
into the arms of Henry II. No means came amiss that 
could forward this end. The mission of Ardinghello gave 
France a pretext for threatening to recall her bishops and 
prelates from Bologna, while in Rome Cardinal du Bellay was 
hard at work to prevent the despatch of plenipotentiaries 
to the Emperor. If unsuccessful in this attempt, he was at 
least to manage so that they should not be present at the 
Diet, but betake themselves to some place agreed upon 
with the Estates of Germany.^ Du Bellay found sup- 
porters in Cardinals Cupis and Carafa, who were anti- 
Spanish ; the interests of Charles V. were safe in the loyal 
keeping of Cardinals Juan Alvarez de Toledo, Francesco 
Mendoza, and Cueva. 

Paul III. weighed the matter without coming to any im- 
mediate resolution. He invited provisional opinions from 
the conciliar deputies in Rome and from the Legates in 
Bologna in order to be fully armed in case a decision 
should become imperative without longer delay.^ At 
last Santa Croce received instructions to represent to 
Charles V. that, in spite of several consultations, the diffi- 
culties of the Interim still appeared too great to admit 
of a final decision within the short space of time at the 
Pope's disposal. In order, however, to relieve the Emperor 
from suspense and uncertainty Santa Croce had been sent 

1 Cf. PiEPER, 1 08 seq. 

2 See Nuntiaturberichte, X., xliv, 476 seq.^ 485 seq. 

3 See ihid.^ 317 ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. 16. 


to announce that, within ten or twelve days at the latest, 
plenipotentiaries would be despatched with the most 
comprehensive faculties.^ For this proceeding a leading 
motive was also the knowledge that the Emperor intended 
the plenipotentiaries to have only a superficial and formal 
share in the new organization of religion.^ Charles V. 
was all the more surprised at the fresh postponement of a 
decision, as he had expected, from a letter of the 27th of 
April of Farnese, that Santa Croce would certainly bring 
with him satisfactory instructions not only on the matter 
of the Council, but concerning the mission of the pleni- 

As soon as Charles saw clearly that he had been deceived 
he determined to show no further consideration for the 
Pope, and to go on with his religious policy on his own 
initiative entirely. In order to cut off the possibility of 
any protest he refused on one pretext and another to give 
Santa Croce an audience until the decisive step had been 
taken. Not until he had read aloud the Interim to the 
Estates in a solemn session of the Diet did he receive the 
nuncio together with Sfondrato. When both arrived punctu- 
ally at the hour of audience they were obliged to wait for 
a short time, as the Emperor was still detained by the Diet. 
Santa Croce declared drily that his instructions, which con- 
cerned both the mission of the plenipotentiaries and the 
restitution of Piacenza, had been rendered nugatory by the 
announcement just made of the Interim; but, in spite of 
that, he produced them. Charles V. tried to justify his 
conduct on the ground that the Diet could no longer be 

' See Miscell. d. stor. Ital., V.'', looi seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 
316 seq. 

2 Cf. the expression of Santa Croce in Vivaldini's report in the 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 511. 

^ Farnese's letter to Sfondrato, ibid.^ X., 322, 323. 


kept in any suspense. When the nuncio attempted 
to broach the subject of Piacenza he was interrupted by 
the remark that that was a private matter which was 
essentially one of domestic interest to the Farnese family 
and must be subordinate to affairs of public importance. 
The nuncio then tried to add something in reference to 
the Interim ; but the Emperor rejoined haughtily and 
seriously that in this matter he had acted only as a 
legitimate and Catholic prince.^ 

Santa Croce had informed the King of the Romans 
openly, before his audience with Charles V., that the Pope 
did not see what object there could be in sending Legates 
if they were not to possess full powers in dealing with the 
matter of the Interim. Santa Croce also reminded 
Ferdinand that Charles had allowed it to be said that it 
would suffice if the Legates' share in the undertaking were 
restricted to maintaining the prestige of the Holy See, 
while in other respects they were simply to register his 
wishes and do nothing to destroy a plan which he had 
brought into existence with much trouble and anxiety. 
Paul III. was of opinion that if he were to send Legates to 
Augsburg only to execute the commands of Charles V,, he 
would virtually be abandoning his office, and the Emperoi 
would then become the Pope.^ 

In order to make the Interim acceptable to the Catholic 
princes and also perhaps to allay some personal scruples 
of conscience, Charles allowed at the eleventh hour some 
changes to be made in the formula. The proposal to the 
Diet was based on the understanding that the Interim 
should be " personally arranged " by Charles. In the 

* The as yet undiscovered report of Santa Croce of May i6, 1548, in 
Pallavicini, 1. 10, c. ly , n. J ; cf. also Sfondrato's letter of the same 
day in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 328 seq. 

* Vivaldini's report of May 16, 1548 ibid., X., 511. 


deliberations in the Diet which immediately followed an 
opposition already made itself conspicuous, resting in part 
on the objection that the formula ought not to apply to 
all the Estates but only to the Protestant. Regardless of 
this, the Elector of Mayence declared in the name of the 
Estates that since they had entrusted to the Emperor 
personally the provisional settlement of the religious 
dissensions until such time as a decision was delivered by 
a General Council, it was right that they should pay 
obedience to the Imperial decree. As this declaration was 
received without contradiction, the Emperor drew the 
conclusion that his ordinances met with general acceptance. 
He was soon to learn a very different lesson. 

Although the further proceedings were kept as private 
as possible, Sfondrato very soon became aware that the 
Elector Maurice was by no means enamoured of the Interim, 
and that in the towns the dislike of the scheme was still 
more intense. From conversations with Charles's con- 
fessor, Soto, and others he gathered that the Emperor in- 
tended in any case to push his new settlement of religious 
affairs in Germany to a finish without the Pope. In an 
audience given to Sfondrato on the 21st of May, Charles 
made no disguise of his distrust of Paul III., and declared 
that he would carry out his undertaking without Papal 
assistance ; the Legates must appear with adequate faculties, 
otherwise their mission would be useless. In the matter 
of Piacenza he was determined to do nothing as long as 
his demands were unfulfilled. 

With regard to the Interim, Sfondrato was able to report 
that the difficulties were steadily increasing.^ Santa Croce 
said the same with fuller detail in his despatch of May the 
22nd. In his attempts to control opinion in the towns, 

^ See Sfondrato's letters of May 19, 22, and 23, 1548, in the 
Nuntiaturberichte, X., 333 scq., 337 seq. 


Charles reminded them that he had promised to make no 
changes in matters of religion without the consent of the 
Council. Santa Croce thought that the Interim was only 
a threat by which Charles was endeavouring to browbeat 
the Pope.^ 

Undeterred by the strong opposition to the Imperial 
decree on religion manifested by the Protestants, 
Charles V. in the middle of June indulged in another act 
of aggression on the purely ecclesiastical regime by pro- 
posing to the Diet as supplementary to the Interim a long- 
considered scheme of reform for the Catholic clergy.^ 
Here also he was acting once more from good intentions : 
by sweeping away abuses in her government the nearer 
approach of Protestants to the Church would be facilitated. 
But excellent as many of the provisions in the new 
ordinance of reform were, they were incapable from the 
first of being effectually enforced owing to the absence of 
any legitimate authority, the life-giving principle of all 
legislation, ecclesiastical or other. Ordinances dealing 
with the choice and ordination of the clergy, with the 
administration of the Sacraments, with Church discipline, 
with excommunication and the like, lay outside the 
province of the temporal ruler.^ Even Sfondrato, who 
hitherto had suffered with an excess of patience the 
arbitrary proceedings of the Emperor, found this too much. 
The policy of the Emperor, he complained, was dictated 
by an unscrupulous selfishness ; whoever dared to oppose 

* Nuntiaturberichte, X., 339 seq. 

' " Formula reformationis " in HaRTZHEIM, VI., 741 seq. ; cf. PaSTOR, 
Reunionsbestrebungen, 392 seq. ; Postina, 97 ; see also Brauburger, 
De formula reformationis eccl. ab imp. Carolo V. in comit. Aug. 
statibus eccl. oblata, Mogunt., 1782. 

3 Cf. Raynai.dus, 154S, n. 57; Pallavicini, 1. II, c. 2; Janssen- 
Pastor, III , i8ih ed., 691. 


him was suspected and calumniated. The Emperor, Santa 
Croce reported at the same time, was puffed up with 
success and the knowledge that behind him was an army 
of four-and-twenty thousand men.^ 

This consciousness of armed power explains the attempt 
on the part of Charles not merely to reorganize the 
Protestant religion but also to reform the Catholic clergy 
without seeking the participation of the Pope. Had he 
succeeded in imposing his influence on the internal affairs 
of the Church so as to carry out both these schemes, he 
would inevitably have held a place as the head of the 
reunited and pacified Empire such as no Emperor had held 
for centuries, a place from which he could have dictated 
his commands concerning the questions of religion as well 
as the affairs of Italy to Pope and Council alike. 

The declaration of the Elector of Mayence that the 
Estates would acquiesce in the Interim was much too pre- 
mature. The Elector Maurice of Saxony, the Margrave 
Hans of Brandenburg-Ciistrin, and the Count Palatine 
Wolfgang of Zweibrlicken put in protests almost at once. 
The towns of the Empire took up the position that they 
must first report home. Charles did all he could to prevent 
a combination of these discontented spirits with the rest 
of the Protestant opposition. He succeeded, and Maurice 
was prevailed upon to make a " roundabout '' declaration and 
was then dismissed. Hans of Ciistrin, whose opposition 
was stubborn, was promptly ordered by the Emperor to 
quit the Diet. From the Count Palatine Wolfgang, Charles 
was content to receive the assurance that he would do all 
that his conscience allowed. The weaker towns were 
cowed by threats, and in the course of June the submission 
of the majority to the Imperial ordinance was received. It 
was a greater success for Charles V. that not merely the 

' See Nuntiaturberichte, X., xlvi, 374 seq., 377 seq. 


Electors Palatine and of Brandenburg but also the captive 
Landgrave of Hesse took the same course.^ Thereupon 
Charles took steps to close the Diet, and with the pro- 
nouncement of the Recess on the 30th of June, amid no 
dissentient voices, the Interim became the law of the 
Empire. After the archbishops, bishops, and prelates 
present in Augsburg had declared their agreement on the 
23rd of June with the formula of reformation, the latter 
was also published.^ 

To all outward appearance the Emperor had almost 
reached his goal. All that now remained to do was to 
carry the decrees into execution. For this the state of 
affairs in south Germany afforded the most favourable 
prospect, where Charles could make a strong impression 
by the weight of personality and the fear of his dreaded 
Spanish soldiery. 

Even if all the South German States tried to save as 
much as was possible of their Protestant profession of 
religion by means of delays, excuses, and petitions, yet to 
all outward appearance they more or less submitted to the 
Interim. Where serious opposition was shown the 
Emperor took decisive measures of reprisal. The hostile 
preachers had now to yield and submit to the same fate 
which they had so often brought down on their opponents. 
In Augsburg and Ulm the opposition was broken down 
by a change of constitution. Even Constance had to 
accept the Interim and permit the restoration of Catholic 
worship. The city had indeed repelled successfully an 
onslaught of the Spaniards, but in view of the threatening 
attitude maintained by Charles V. deemed it advisable to 

* See Haberlin, I., 308 seq. ; WolF, Interim, 80 seq ; Wolf, I., 

427 ; Pastor, Reunionsbestrebungen, 391 seq. ; Nuntiaturherichte, X., 
353, 390. 391 ^eq., 393. 

2 See Haberlin, I., 371 ; Druffel, Beitriige, III., 103. 


place itself under the protection of his brother Ferdinand's 
suzerainty. Other places, on the contrary, with the power- 
ful Nuremberg at their head, observed with success a course 
of conduct calculated simply to keep up the semblance of 
obedience. Duke Ulrich of Wurtemberg also published 
the Interim only to the effect that no hindrances would be 
put in the way of its observance. Here the Catholic 
Church gained nothing by the ordinance, but on the 
contrary suffered much disadvantage. 

The Landgrave Philip of Hesse was ready to purchase 
his freedom at any price. His standpoint was certainly at 
first " to accept everything in order afterwards to observe 
nothing." After making closer acquaintance with the 
Interim, he formed the opinion, however, that the formula 
might be accepted without scruple, since it contained 
nothing contrary to Christian teaching. He afterwards 
tried to bring his preachers round to this opinion, 
but with a very scanty measure of success. In the 
Palatinate and Julier-Cleves things turned out well for 
the Emperor, and the new ordinance was there most 
thoroughly carried out. Even the Margrave Albert of 
Brandenburg-Kulmbach showed himself amenable, despite 
the opposition among his preachers. On the other hand, 
it was in the highest degree disconcerting that the Prince 
Elector Joachim II. of Brandenburg, who was often looked 
upon as the author of the new enactment, showed no 
enthusiasm for its execution, and tried to deceive the 
Emperor by a mere show of obedience. The wily Maurice 
of Saxony did his best to steer his course between the 
Emperor on the one hand and the Catholic Estates on 
the other. The Interim of Leipzig published by him 
contained, with the exception of some concessions, 
more semblance than reality. Generally speaking, this 
ambiguously worded document remained a thing of 


ink and parchment ; practically the religious conditions of 
the Electorate remained precisely where they were. An 
unconditional negative was offered to the Interim by the 
captive John Frederick, whose son had not much more 
to lose. Magdeburg and the Hanseatic towns followed 
suit, their remoteness from the centre of Imperial power 
rendering them immune from danger.^ 

The ill will of the majority of the upper ranks of society 
was combined in many quarters with the bitterest opposi- 
tion from the mass of the people ; the opinions and 
interests of countless numbers had already become deeply 
rooted in the Church system. It now became apparent 
with what success, in the course of a single generation, the 
reforming theologians had worked as preachers and writers 
to bring odium on all that was Catholic. Charles V. had 
not put an end, as, after his victory, he had the power to 
do, to this movement. The permission which he had 
granted, in the hour of success,^ was now turned against 
him. The Protestant zealots were successful in augment- 
ingi by means of a cleverly conducted agitation, the hostile 
feeling of the people towards the "papistical" Interim. 
Public opinion was worked upon by means of libels, 
ballads, caricatures, satirical woodcuts of the coarsest 
kind. In glaring colours the new organization was dis- 
played to the common people as an anti-Christian 
monstrosity: as a three-headed dragon with a serpent's 
tail, a scorpion's sting, and claw feet " In Latin the name 
of this worm is Interim." "The devil himself," it was 
announced, "was author of the Interim," and the Pope, his 
viceroy, wished to force it upon Germany. 

* See JanSSEn-PaSTOR, III., i8th ed., 696 seq. To the bibliography 
there given add: F. Hermann, Das Interim in Hessen, Marburg, 

* Cf. Corp. Ref., VI., 570 seq. ; MenzeL, III., 128 seq. 


" The Pope would drive the German land 
To bend, a slave, at his command. 
And for God's Word receive from him 
That Devil's creed, the Interim." ^ 

As soon as Paul III. received news of the Interim he 
ordered the new formula of religion to be laid before the 
expert theologians in Rome and Bologna. The latter 
found fault not merely with various points of detail con- 
tained in the Interim, but also laid stress on the principal 
sides of the question in the decision of which the Emperor, 
a layman, had overstepped the legitimate compass of his 
activity and directly infringed on the province of Papal 
and conciliar authority. The Legates of the Council 
called in the Dominican, Ambrogio Catarino, and the 
Augustinian Hermit, Seripando, to examine the draft. 
They wrote on the 2nd of May 1548 to Cardinal Farnese 
that, in the exposition of the doctrines of original sin and of 
justification, the decisions of the Tridentine Council must 
not be departed from. With regard to the treatment of 
doctrines not yet decided upon by the Council, they 
presented a series of strictures on the formulae contained 
in the Interim, into which they went in fuller detail in May 
in another declaration.^ 

' Besides the writings adduced by PaSTOR (Reunionsbestrebungen, 
394 seq.) and Janssen-Pastor (III , i 8th ed., 699), cf. also Serapeum, 
1S62, 289 scqq., 320 seq. 

2 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. ID, c. 17; Raynaldus, 1548, n. 51, 54, 56; 
Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. Merkle, I., 736 seq., 773 ; Calenzio, 
Documenti, 267, 268, 271. The Roman objections to the Interim are 
in the Vatican Library in *Cod. Vat, 3931 : "Interim cum adnota- 
tionibus." Here in the preface (f. i) to Paul III. it is laid down that 
in matters of dogma the decision rests with Pope and Council only ; 
then follow : ff. 2-57, the text of the Interim ; ff. 59-64, the strong 
objections of "Franc, de Castelione, general, praedic." (without author's 
name ; also in Secret Archives of the Vatican, XL, 45, f. 515 seqq.)', i\. 


Mendoza saw in the Papal consultations over the Interim 
only the intention of protracting the decision on the affairs 
of Germany. Paul III. represented to him in vain that 
the Diet had no authority to deal independently with 
ecclesiastical matters ; in vain he indicated objectionable 
passages in the Interim.^ An assertion of such objections 
was cut short by the action of the Emperor, which was as 
sudden as it was arbitrary. When the news reached Rome 
on the 24th of May it naturally made the worst impression 
on the Curia. It seemed unprecedented that the Emperor 
should arrogate to himself the right of decision in matters 
of faith and attempt to exercise this authority by confirm- 
ing erroneous teaching against the mind of the Church 
and the decrees of the Council. A consistory had been 
summoned for the 25th of May to draw up the faculties of 
the Legates about to be sent to Germany, but this was now 
abandoned. A more fitting subject of deliberation was 
the arbitrary conduct of the Emperor, which had aroused 
indignation in the whole College of Cardinals. The French 
were jubilant, for they now felt certain that a breach was 
inevitable between the Emperor and the Pope and that 
the latter would give his unconditional adhesion to their 
own King.2 

Paul III. at first shared the feelings of the Cardinals; 
indeed, he said to the Florentine envoy, " The die is 

67-68, **those of the "Epic. Scalens." ; f. 76 seq., further remarks on the 
Interim; see also Cod. Vat., 6222, f. 121 seq. Cf. also Novaes, VII., 
51 ; BerninO, IV., 461 ; Merkle, I., 771 ; and for Francesco Romeo 
de Castiglione, Hefner's work, Entstehung des Trienter Recht 
fertigungsdekretes, Paderborn, 1909, 54. 

1 See Mendoza's letter of May 23, 1548, in the Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 679 seq. 

« See Nuntiaturberichte, X., 343, 345, 688; Druffel, Beitrage, I. 
1 14 seq. ; cf. Pallavicini, 1. 11, c. i. 


cast." ^ It seems as if the Pope wished at once to give 
judgment on the validity of the translation of the Council, 
and immediately after the consistory he sent for the four 
Cardinals entrusted with this question. Yet it is doubtful 
whether he really intended to take such a step;^ with 
cautious wisdom, he took no hurried action, but first 
invited the opinion of experienced advisers. The latter 
were greatly at variance. Del Monte, in the first burst of 
anger, had proposed a removal of the Council to Rome, 
but came round afterwards to the view of the French 
ambassadors at Bologna. The latter, on hearing of the 
publication of the Interim, declared immediately that the 
Pope should now pronounce in favour of the validity and 
then suspend the Council until a more convenient season 
should arrive. Cardinal Cervini, on the contrary, preferred 
that the Council should resume its work at Bologna, but 
that no session should be held until every effort had been 
made to try and arrive at an understanding with the 

The Pope had entertained the idea, for a moment, of 
removing the Council to a Venetian city and so making 
an end to the controversy ; but the Republic would not 
consent to this on account of the Turks and the Protestants.* 
As no decision on the validity of the translation was 
given, the Council remained for more than a year longer 
in Bologna without taking any action as regarded the 
Interimistic suspension. On the 4th of June Girolamo 
Dandino, Bishop of Imola, was sent to France, where he 
had represented Paul III. already from 1546 to 1547. The 

^ See Nuntiaturberichte, X., 360 (report of June 2, 1548); cf. the 
letter of the Portuguese envoy of June 12, 1548,111 Corp. dipl. Port., 
VL, 259. 

2 See Nuntiaturberichte, X., xlvi, 345. 

• Pallavicini, 1. II, c. I. ^ Campana, 517 seq. 


ostensible pretext for his mission was the marriage of 
Orazio Farnese with Diana of Poitiers, the natural daughter 
of King Henry II., while the real purpose was the con- 
sideration of the conciliar question and the contemplated 

On the day before Dandino's departure Mendoza had an 
audience of the Pope. His attempt to excuse the Emperor 
was waved aside by Paul 1 1 1., who said that it was to be 
deplored that Charles should allow himself to be led by 
bad advisers ; apart from that, the Interim contained 
objectionable provisos, and was an infringement on the 
spiritual sphere. Mendoza tried, but in vain, to get a 
hearing on the question of the mission of the Legates, and 
of the decision on the validity of the translation. Paul III. 
also withheld any decision regarding the despatch of 
Pietro Bertano to Germany, which had been spoken of 
for some time. While on the affairs of Piacenza, the Pope 
insisted that the matter was not one only of private 
concern, but that it affected public interests, and could 
only be satisfactorily settled when good relations with the 
Emperor were restored.^ 

Soon after this audience orders were given for the 
recall of Cardinal Sfondrato and the despatch of Pietro 
Bertano, Bishop of Fano, in his place as nuncio to 
Germany.^ The situation then became still worse owing 
to the Emperor's arbitrary behaviour with regard to the 
reform of the German clergy. In the first moment of 
excitement in Rome, it was believed that Charles only 
intended to represent the Pope as a defaulter to duty, 

» See Pallavicini, loc. cit. ; Pieper, 132 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, 
X., 363 n. ; FoNTANA, III., 381 seq. 

2 See Farnese's and Maffei's reports in the Nuntiaturberichte, X., 
360 seq. 

3 Ibid.^ X., 372. 


wherefore the temporal head of Christendom was forced to 
take the questions of reform and of the Council into his 
own hands.^ The aged Pope was furious. The French drew 
such vivid pictures of the dangers to which his person 
was exposed that he took special measures of security. 
The watches were strengthened, and Ottavio Farnese had 
to sleep in the ante-chamber.^ It was at this time that 
Paul III. told one of the Cardinals that he hoped to sur- 
vive the Emperor, but that in any case, before he died, he 
would yet do something which would set the whole world 
talking.^ Cardinal Farnese spread a report that Bertano 
had instructions to address to Charles the first admonition 
which precedes the greater censures of the Church.* That, 
however, was not by any means the object of his mission ; 
as a matter of fact, the first outbreak of temper in the 
Curia at the attack of Charles on the privileges of the 
Church very soon gave place to a calmer estimate of 
circumstances. Seeing how uncertain French support was, 
and how determined the Venetians were to remain neutral, 
it seemed imperative to make use even of the situation 
created by the Emperor, and of the difficulties that situa- 
tion involved ; all the more so as Charles V., at the same 
time, was inclined to come round, having declared by word 
of mouth to the ecclesiastical Estates that he did not wish, 
by his reform ordinances, to limit episcopal authority, 
and even kept in view the restoration of ecclestiastical 

The choice of Bertano seemed excellent. This prelate, 
indeed, a member of the Dominican Order, possessed not 
only the entire confidence of the Pope, but that also of the 

» Nuntiaturberichte, X., 384. ^ Legaz. di Serristori, 168. 

3 Nuntiaturberichte, X., 385, 699. 

* See Farnese's letter of June 13, 1548, in DE Leva, V., 5. 

* See DE Leva, V., 3 se^. ; Nuntiaturberichte, X., 385 sef. 
VOL. XII. ?8 


Emperor from the time of his previous mission. With 
Cardinal Madruzzo he was on terms of close friendship. 
In order to give no occasion for suspicion he did not pay 
a visit, on his journey through Bologna, to Cardinal del 
Monte, hated by the Imperialist party. He apologized for 
this want of courtesy on the score of his rapid journey.^ 

Bertano reached Trent on the 23rd of June, where 
Madruzzo instructed him frankly on the condition of 
Germany. On the 30th of June he reached Augsburg, 
and with Sfondrato was received in audience on the 2nd 
of July by Charles V. In this long interview it was made 
clear how much importance Charles attached to the 
mission of a Legate with full faculties, as without them his 
Interim must remain a dead letter. Santa Croce, as well 
as Sfondrato, advised the Pope to make the experiment 
by sending the Legates, a step which would also be of 
advantage in the matter of Piacenza.^ The negotiations 
between the Emperor and Bertano seemed to give satisfac- 
tion to both parties. The nuncio, in his letter, said very 
confidently that Charles V. would be willing to accommodate 
the Pope in private matters if Rome would only show a 
spirit of concession in public affairs.^ Bertano's proposal, 
that the reform of the Church should be undertaken in 
Rome by all or a portion of the Fathers of the Council, 
aimed at making a clean sweep of the old controversy over 
the validity of Trent or Bologna. Charles could not 
decline this proposal, as he had made it himself through 
Mendoza in February, but he wished that all this should 
be without prejudice to the Synod of Trent. Farnese 
shrank from giving a written promise to this effect to 
Fernando Montesa, who, as secretary to Mendoza, was at 

* See Pallavicini, 1. ii,c. i ; ^ Druffel, Beitrage, I., 122. 
' See Nuntiaturberichte, X., 388 seq., 398 seq, 
9 See Druffel, I., 128. 


that time officially occupied in Rome. If, in spite of these 
difficulties, an agreement was reached afterwards, its terms 
were partly of a very general description.^ 

This was the source of new dissensions between Emperor 
and Pope. Each of the two parties in Rome described 
the contents of the agreement as being something different 
from what it was.^ Paul III. sought, by threats of an 
alliance with France, to force the Imperialists to give way. 
The negotiations on this subject were again more actively 
carried on. Not in consequence of these, but in order to 
carry out his own designs in northern Italy, King Henry 
II. suddenly appeared in Piedmont in the beginning of 
August, avowedly to inspect the fortresses there, but really 
with another aim in view : Ottavio Farnese was at the head 
of a conspiracy against Ferrante Gonzaga, the murderer 
of his father, and the French King hoped, in case of its 
success, to derive some advantage. Henry sent his 
secretary Aubespine to Rome to restrain the Pope from 
making concessions to Charles and to gain his consent to 
the alliance in the form which the King desired. When 
Aubespine arrived in Rome on the 23rd of August the 
situation had already undergone a complete alteration. 
The conspiracy against Ferrante had been discovered, and 
disturbances in France had called Henry back again. The 
King still insisted on the immediate surrender of Parma 
to his vassal Orazio Farnese as the necessary condition 
preliminary to an active league and the recapture of 
Piacenza. Paul III. refused to enter into this compact; 
Aubespine therefore left Rome on the 26th of August 
without having settled anything.* 

1 See DE Leva, V., 7, 

2 See Druffel, I., 135 ; DE LEVA, V., 8 seq. 

3 See Maurenbrecher, 202 seq.\ Druffel, L- 156; de Lev^ 

v., 12 scq. 


Five days later the Imperial diplomacy experienced a 
triumph. Paul III. showed an inclination to meet the 
Emperor's wish that Legates should be sent to Germany. 
In a consistory on the 31st of August three bishops, not 
Cardinals, probably out of consideration for Madruzzo, 
were appointed. Besides Bertano there were also Luigi 
Lippomano, coadjutor of Verona, and Sebastiano Pighini, 
who shortly before had been nominated to Ferentino.^ In 
the same consistory the Pope approved the Bull prescribing 
the Legatine faculties to be used in Germany; the document 
was read out without any further discussion or voting, as the 
French Cardinals wished.^ Long consultations had taken 
place beforehand which presented great difficulties, as the 
Pope was anxious to avoid any appearance that his Legates 
were instrumental in carrying out Imperial ordinances which 
he had himself regarded as encroachments on his authority. 
Experienced theologians, Cardinals Cervini and del Monte 
as conciliar Legates, a deputation of the Segnatura, finally 
the commission of Cardinals appointed for the affairs of 
the Council, were asked their opinion. The opinions of 
the last named guided the decisions of Paul III. on the 
most important points.^ 

The faculties were drawn up in such a way that they 
gave an opportunity to the Legates in employing them to 
remind Charles of the incident of Piacenza. Even in 
other respects everything was so arranged that on the 

* See Acta Consist, in Merkle, I. 792. 

2 See Montesa's report of Sept. 10, 1548, in Druffel, I., 155; 
Serristori's letter of Aug. 31, 1548 (State Archives, Florence) ; the Bull 
in Le Plat, IV., 121 seq. ; the instruction for the Legates in 
Laemmer, Mon. Vat, 395 seq., with the incorrect date 1542. Cf. also 
Gott. Gel. Anzeigen, 1884, II., 583 seq. 

'See Raynaldus, 1548, n. 46 seq.\ DRUFfel, I., 146 seq.; 
DE Leva, V., 18 s»q. 


development of this question very much depended. The 
two Legates prolonged their journey purposely, and did 
not join Bertano in Brussels, where the Emperor in 
the meantime had come, until the 23rd of December.^ 
Pighini's experiences on the road were more than depress- 
ing. He found an outward show of religion, occasioned 
by the Emperor's victory and his ordinances, but the 
temper of the people was more than ever in sympathy 
with the movement of innovation. Mass was said almost 
everywhere, but in empty churches ; nobody asked the 
nuncios to exercise their functions, and not once were the 
customary observances of courtesy and respect shown to 
them. Pighini concluded, from all that he had seen, that 
the religious troubles in Germany would find no settlement 
by means of the Interim; nothing could be done in that 
direction except by measures of extreme severity.^ 

Charles V. was no stranger to the adverse turn of 
affairs in the Empire. In October 1548 he expressed to 
his brother Ferdinand his anxiety lest all his efforts for 
the pacification of Germany might be in vain.* How com- 
pletely the policy of the Diet of Augsburg had failed he 

> See DOLLINGER, Beitrage, I., 155; Maurenbrecher, 209; 
DE Leva, V., 21 seqq. Mendoza had already, on Sept. i, asked for the 
alteration of the faculties (see Serristori's report of Sept. i, 1548, in 
State Archives, Florence). 

2 See Pallavicini, 1. 1 1, c. 2 ; DE Leva, V., 23 scq. Pighini's 
comfortless *reports, dated Mayence, Nov. 5 and 16, 1548 (Carte Cerv., 
22, f. 17 seq.^ in State Archives, Florence), agree with Lippomano's 
observations. The latter *wrote on Dec. 6, 1548, from Cologne to 
Cardinal Cervini : " Siamo venuti in questa cittk gia X giorni, nella 
quale anchora che sia catholicissima, non vi h mai compassa persona 
a vederci, n^ del consiglio nh del clero, et il t arcivescovo si trova 
absente in Vestvalia. II caso h che costoro tutti non conoscono ne 
vogliono conoscere persona se non che dipenda da S. M'^ o che venga 
con suo ordine, et gia 1' habbiamo provato per tutta I' Alta Germania." 

« See Druffel, L, 171. 


certainly did not yet realize ; on the contrary, to the 
astonishment of clear-sighted observers, he clung with 
characteristic tenacity for some time longer to the execu- 
tion of his religious decrees, even after their total futility 
had been established beyond contradiction.^ All these 
well-intentioned efforts were doomed to misfortune. 
Years before, the strict Catholic party had insisted on 
the radical defect that the management of ecclesiastical 
affairs by the laity without permission from the highest 
authority in the Church was inadmissible.^ It caused pro- 
found grief that a monarch of such high reputation and of 
such sincere devotion to the Catholic faith should, at the 
cost of bodily suffering and sore anxiety of mind, have been 
led astray by erroneous judgments on matters of religious 
belief and by the unscrupulous counsels of politicians. 

The decrees of the Diet on reform were not less in- 
effectual than those on the Interim, Here too the penalty 
had to be paid for issuing a whole series of reforming 
decrees on the duties of bishops, the visitation of dioceses, 
the foundation of chairs of theology, without consulting 
the authority of Church, Pope, or Council. Moreover, the 
Imperial ordinances only stated what reforms were to take 
place, but not how they were to be carried out, or how 
the difficulties, which certainly were to be expected, were 
to be overcome. All recognition is due to those German 
bishops who, in their provincial synods, not merely tried 
to give effect to the Augsburg decrees, but also to supple- 
ment them in such a way that they should be brought 
into line with the doctrinal decisions already pronounced 
by the Council of Trent. Even if this enthusiasm soon 
slackened, yet these Synods did effective work as pioneers 

* Cf. Janssen-Pastor, III., i8th ed., 691. 

8 Cf. Orlandinus, Hist. Soc. Jesu, I., 1. 4, n. 112; Ranke, 
Deutsche Gesch., IV., 6th ed., 255. 


of subsequent reformation.^ Stiil the religious affairs of 
Germany remained at first in a deplorable condition. 

The reception given to Lippomano and Pighini, the 
Papal Legates, was far from promising. In the audience 
of presentation on the 3rd of January 1549 the Emperor 
complained of the Pope's dilatoriness and of the protracted 
journey of his representatives.^ In their conversations 
with the ministers the greatest difficulties arose, as the 
Legates had not brought a general permission for the 
marriage of priests, but only a dispensation for particular 
cases where, unfortunately, no other course was possible. 
With regard to the permission in the Interim that priests 
who had entered into wedlock should not only preach, but 
also administer the Sacraments, the Emperor himself had 
at that time serious scruples. But Ferdinand I. and the 
Emperor's council were of opinion that this enactment 
must hold good, otherwise the Interim would be made 
impracticable owing to the want of priests. The Legates 
reported the matter to Rome ; their opinion was that 
such a concession was not permissible.^ 

When the Imperialists, whose claims were always being 
pushed forward, advanced with yet a further demand that 
full powers should be transferred to the bishops and other 
suitable persons, the Legates interposed with clearly 
defined counter-demands : the expulsion of the Protestant 
preachers and authors, the prohibition to print or sell their 
books, the restitution of illegally appropriated Church 

* Cf. Haberlin, L, 498 seq. ; WoLF, I., 440 seq. ; Phillips, Die 
Diozesansynode, Freiburg, 1849, 76 seq. ; Histor.-polit. BL, XXXV., 
1154 seq.', Tiib. Theol. Quartalschn, 1884, 665 seq.-, Loserth in 
.\rchiv fiir osterr. Gesch., LXXXV., 143 seqq. 

2 See the nuncio's letter of Jan. 3, 1 549, in DE Leva, V., 24. 

3 Laemmer, Men. Vat., 394, 396 ; Druffel, L, 186 seq. \ DE Leva, 
v., 24 seq. 


property, and the reform of the Church in Germany under 
the direction of the Pope. Charles V. declared with some 
excitement that such measures could not be considered until 
the salutary effects of the concessions of the Interim had 
been tested ; he would not give permission to the prelates of 
Trent to go to Rome to discuss the question of reform until 
the faculties had first been put into operation. Paul III., 
who attached great importance to an early assemblage in 
Rome of the reforming episcopate, thereupon gave orders 
that no difficulties should be raised to the transfer of plenary 
powers to persons designated by the Emperor.^ 

Fresh delays were now caused by the further demand of 
the Imperialists for the issue of a Bull declaring that the 
dispensations at the bestowal of the Legates should be 
valid until such time as a Council pronounced a decision 
upon them. Cardinal Farnese, acting on a Papal order, 
sent instructions to Bertano on the 26th of April 1549 
which removed this difficulty. It was to be left to the 
Legates' discretion to fix the time for which the dispensa- 
tions to communicate under both kinds, or concessions of 
a similar kind, were to be granted, upon the condition 
however, that such period of time should not extend 
beyond the duration of the Council.^ As soon as a satis- 
factory agreement had been reached in May concerning 
the transference of the faculties, the necessary Bulls were 
printed and sent by the Emperor to the bishops ot 
Germany with the injunction that they were to proceed in 
compliance with them,^ 

» Cf. Maurenbrecher, 209 ; DE LEVA, V., 25-27. 

* PALLAVICINI, 1. II, C. 2. 

3 See Le Plat, IV., 121 seq.\ DRUFFEL, I., 224 seq., 883 seq.\ 
DE Leva, V.,29. Ranke (V.,6th ed., 78) says : " On i8th August 1549 
appeared Cardinal Otto von Truchsess, Bishop of Augsburg, to whom 
if to anyone must be attributed the character of an orthodox adherent 


If the Pope had entertained the hope that Charles V. 
would now show himself more conciliatory on questions still 
awaiting settlement, he was completely out of his reckoning. 
The despatch of the German bishops to Trent and the 
restoration of Piacenza were both matters on which the 
Emperor was as unwilling as ever to meet the demands of 
Paul III. 

As a mediator in the affairs of Piacenza, Count Giulio 
Orsini had been employed by the Pope. Deceived by 
the compliments and general promises of the Imperialist 
minister, Orsini looked upon the surrender of Piacenza as 

of the Roman Curia. He took his place in his cathedral-church of 
Augsburg with all the pomp due to his rank, preceded by his cross, 
the silver sceptre, and the Cardinal's hat. He mounted a pulpit speci- 
ally erected for him and hung with red velvet in order to announce that 
the Interim contained nothing that was hurtful or onerous.'^ From a 
letter of Cardinal Otto, dat. Dillingen, Aug. 3, 1549 (Winter, I., 151), 
it is clear that his Indults comprised not only the Communion under 
both kinds but also priesdy marriage. In Druffel (Beitrage, I., 287) 
there is another letter from the Cardinal, dat. Dillingen, Sept. 18, 1549, 
according to which he had declared in Augsburg that " the Emperor 
had obtained from the Pope an Indult for communion sub utraque 
specie and for priestly marriage." Egelhaaf (II., 521) declares 
emphatically "that by this step on the Pope's part final recognition 
was now given by the Church to the Imperial decree ; the opposition 
hitherto displayed by the adherents of the old Faith must now for good 
or evil be silenced, and this was of all the greater importance as the 
General of the Dominicans, Romaus himself, had associated himself 
with this opposition in a written protest. The Emperor at once issued 
instructions to the German bishops enjoining them henceforth to 
ordain clergy for pastoral duty on the basis of the Interim in Protestant 
countries, which had not hitherto been done according to ecclesiastical 
order." The proclamation of the Indult concerning marriage of priests 
and communion under both kinds was not, however, a recognition of 
the Interim as a whole, as no document to that eftect is forthcoming. 
With regard to the Papal Indult, Ranke, for the sake of clearness, 
ought to have referred also to Druffel, Beitrage, I., 292. 


a certainty. On Christmas Eve 1548 he arrived in Rome, 
where his presence was awaited with all the greater 
expectation as Bertano's diplomacy was causing great 
dissatisfaction.^ He brought no written, only oral, com- 
munications from Charles and Granvelle. These went so 
far that, as Cattaneo reported to Cardinal Madruzzo, it 
would have been a miracle if they were ever carried out. 
Long consultations followed,"'^ and Giulio Orsini, to the 
great disgust of the French party, was again sent to the 
Emperor in January 1549. From this second mission he 
returned to Rome on the 27th of March with renewed 
hopes of the most sanguine kind ; but Paul III. was now 
proof against deception. When Cardinal du Bellay con- 
gratulated him on the settlement of the dispute about 
Piacenza, he remarked that nothing was yet known for 
certain, Orsini had only brought back instructions for 
Mendoza empowering the latter to negotiate further.^ 
There was afterwards some talk of sending Cardinal 
Farnese to the Emperor. In the end Orsini was again 
appointed in April, in order to push on the execution of 
the promises and to furnish documentary proof of the 
Papal rights over Piacenza. At the same time the nuncio 
Bertano was ordered to use his influence, in the same sense, 
with the Emperor.* 

* See Buonanni's *reports, dat. Rome, Nov. 25 and Dec. 15, 1548 
(State Archives, Florence). 

2 See in Appendix No. 37 Cattaneo's letter of Dec. 29, 1548 (Vice- 
regal Archives, Innsbruck) ; cf. also Campana, 451 seq. 

2 See Druffel, I., 187 seq. ; cf. Campana, 456 seq. ; the *Istruttione 
al S. Giulio Orsini, dat. Jan. 11, 1549, in the Bibliotheca Pia, 222, 
f. I seq.., in Secret Archives of the Vatican, as well as in the Doria 
Pamphili Archives, Rome, Istruz, I., 362 seq. 

* See CuGNONi, Prose di A. Caro, 136 seq.\ Druffel, I., 216, 
217 seq.., 883. Orsini left on April 26, 1549, according to Scipione 
Gabrielli's *report (State Archives, Siena). 


On the 8th of April 1549 the long-expected ^ nomina- 
tion of new Cardinals took place. Applications had been 
made from all quarters. Morone in December 1548 had 
advanced the claims of Paul de Varda, Archbishop of 
Gran, in the name of Ferdinand I.,^ and at the same time 
Cardinal du Bellay had pestered Paul III. with importunate 
demands.^ The Pope had given no heed to any of these 
solicitations. Only four Italians, who were in his intimacy 
and through whom he hoped to traverse the schemes of 
Cardinal Gonzaga with regard to the choice of his 
successor,* were appointed on the 8th of April 1549. They 
were Girolamo Verallo, Gian Angelo de' Medici, Filiberto 
Ferreri, and Bernardino Maffei.^ 

The Emperor's answer to the demand for Piacenza was 
anxiously awaited in the Curia. At first there were hopes 
which even Mendoza encouraged,^ but the disillusionment 
came quickly. The answer which both representatives of 
the Pope received simultaneously on the 12th of June was 
as follows: From a minute examination of the docu- 
ments submitted to Mendoza the conclusion had been 
come to that neither the Holy See nor the feudatories 
thereof had any rights to Piacenza or Parma, Never- 
theless, the Emperor was willing to send his court 

* Cj. Buonanni's reports of Sept. 25, Oct. 29, and Nov. 25, 1548 
(State Archives, Florence). For the obstacle to the creation at 
Christmas 1548, see RiBiER, II., 179 seq. ; Druffel, I., 183 seq., 185. 

2 See Buonanni's *report, dat. Rome, Dec. 14, 1548 (State Archives, 
Florence); cf. Druffel, I., 184. 

3 See Buonanni's **report, dat. Rome, Dec. 17, 1548 (State Archives, 

* See Druffel, I., 223 seq. 

6 See ClACONius, III., 735 seq. ; Cardella, IV., 292 seqq. For 
Cardinal Medici's previous life, see SuSTA, Pius IV., Prag, 1900, Zseqq. 

^ See the *report of Serristori, June 11, 1549 (State Archives, 


official, Martin Alfonso da Rio, with a proposal of agree- 
ment. This envoy, who also presented a written statement 
of the claims of the Empire on both cities, once more set 
before the Pope the necessity of his relinquishing his 
pretensions. He also announced that Charles, " not as a 
compensation but as a free mark of favour," would bestow 
on his son-in-law Ottavio Farnese a domain in the kingdom 
of Naples of the value of 40,000 ducats per annum in 
return for his surrender of Parma.^ 

Instead of restoring Piacenza Charles was now demanding 
the acquisition of Parma as well ! The nuncio Bertano, 
who hitherto had been as hopeful as Orsini^ and whose 
reports had been written in a corresponding tone, was 
quite dumbfounded by the turn which the Emperor 
had given to the incident of Piacenza. He now tried 
to raise difficulties for the Emperor in the matter of the 

Rome was given over to astonishment, confusion,* and 
alarm. The agitation was all the greater since Cardinal 
del Monte early in the autumn had announced that he 
had come on traces of a conspiracy in Bologna to hand 
over that city to the Emperor.^ The irritability of Paul HI. 

* The " Risposta data da S. M. al vesc. di Fano" is presented badly 
and with incorrect date in Lett. d. princ, III. (iS77), i^5^ ^^1- W- 
Pallavicini, 1. II, c. 3 ; Maurenbrecher, 211 seq). 

2 See the Avisi of May 25, 1549 (not 1548), in MOLINI, II., 427. 

3 See Maurenbrecher, 209 ; Ribier, II., 216 ; Druffel, I., 272. 

* Bertano's letter to Cardinal Farnese, dat. Brussels, June 23, 1549, 
announcing that all his exertions had been in vain, was brought by 
G. Orsini on July 5 (see Nunz. di Francia, I., A, f. 419''). The 
Emperor's reply of June 12 was handed to Paul HI. on July 18 {ibid., 
f. 409, Secret Archives of the Vatican) ; cf. Corp. dipl. Port., VI., 
320 seq. 

6 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. ii, c. 3 ; Druffel, I., 208 ; de Leva, V., 35. 
See also Legaz. di Serristori, 202. 

THE pope's moderation. 445 

was stimulated by incitements on the part of France,^ and 
the provoking behaviour of Mendoza, who, on presenting 
the tributes from the kingdom of Naples to the Pope, made 
a public display of his contempt.^ Although the spoken 
language of the Pontiff at this time was not kept under 
much restraint, yet his written reply, sent on June the 25th, 
to the Emperor's declaration on the subject of Piacenza 
was full of moderation. He would gladly have abstained 
from replying, if he could have done so without injury to 
the Holy See and himself; being forced to take the 
opposite course, he would not revert to the shameful 
proceedings in Piacenza or to the Emperor's promises, but 
confine himself to the instructions given to Martin Alfonso 
da Rio. According to the representations of Bertano and 
Orsini the Emperor wished, for the pacifying of his own 
conscience, to be made acquainted with the legal claims 
of the Holy See ; the Pope therefore had been willing to 
enter into negotiations, but only on the condition of previous 
restitution ; finally, however, in order not to appear sus- 
picious or harsh, he had given way and laid before Mendoza 
the original documents. Mendoza had not been able to 
make any objections to them. The Emperor, on the 
contrary, now asserts that the Holy See has no legitimate 
title to possession, and ofiers Ottavio a compensation of 
40,000 ducats, on condition that he, the Emperor, is 
also made master of Parma. Whether such conditions are 
acceptable, or whether they are hurtful to the Holy See 
and even Christendom itself, may be left to the judgment 
of God and of mankind. He only prays that the Emperor 
will consult the will of God and his own conscience afresh, 
in order that he may perceive that Piacenza belongs to 

1 See Druffel, I., 270, and also Histor. Zeitschrift, XXXII., 419. 
• 2 cf. Buonanni's *report of June 29, 1549 (State Archives, Florence), 
App.38,andthatofM. Dandoloof June 29, 1549 (State Archives. V^nic). 


the Holy See and that his Majesty, for many reasons, has 
no right to stay its re-delivery; the same reasons hold good 
in respect of Parma.^ 

The relations between the Pope and the Emperor having 
become disturbed once more, it was only natural that France 
should make every attempt to secure the upper hand in 
Rome. The policy of that kingdom was directed to the 
formation in the Pope's mind of a favourable opinion of 
the Catholic sentiments of Henry II. and the prevention 
of any concessions to the Emperor on questions of 
religion. On the 13th of July 1549 Cardinal Ippolito 
d'Este, brother of the Duke of Ferrara, appeared in Rome 
on a mission from the French King and was received with 
the highest marks of respect. He was to replace du 
Bellay, whose performance of his duties had not given 
satisfaction in Paris. Once more the project of a Franco- 
Papal alliance was ardently discussed.^ 

Olivier, the chancellor of Henry II., soon discerned, how- 
ever, that the policy of Paul III. did not go beyond the ac- 
quisition of some amount of importance ^ in the eyes of the 
Emperor through the negotiations with France. Mendoza 

1 The "Risposta data a M. Alonso de ordine de N. S." is in Lett, 
d. princ, III. (1577), 186. DRUFFEL (I., 266) gives it again, although 
he must have inferred that it had been printed from Pallavicini 
(1. 1 1, c. 3), whom he himself cites as evidence for the date. The date 
is also certified by the copy in Cod. Urb., 15 12, f. 93-97, and Cod. 
Barb., LVI II., 30, of Vatican Library. For Bertano's further ineffectual 
negotiations over Piacenza, see his ^reports of Oct. 3, 22, 24, and 
Nov. 3, 1549 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

2 SeeRiBlER, II., 222 seq., 230 seq., 234 seq., 243 seq. ; DE Leva, V., 
26 seqq. On July 19, 1549, Scipione Gabrielli ^reported : "II Papa h 
stato 304 giorni in castello, cosa contra la sua usanza in questi 
tempi, et ogni giorno fanno consigho cosi in castello come in casa 
del rev. Farnese" (State Archives, Siena). 

2 RiBlER, II., 22,(} seq. 


also was not deceived. He was firmly convinced that the 
Pope did not trust the French, and would not break with 
Charles V.^ At first, certainly, it seemed as if a rupture 
over the Council was imminent between the Emperor and 
the Pope. Paul III. wished to remove the existing 
antagonism by summoning the universal episcopate to 
Rome to discuss the reform of the Church. As the 
Emperor could not openly oppose a proposal originally put 
forward by himself, he now tried to nullify it by suggesting 
impossible conditions. He demanded, firstly, that the 
system of reform to be proceeded with at Rome must not 
collide with the ordinances of the Interim and the recom- 
mendations for the improvement of the clergy made to 
the German princes at the Diet of Augsburg ; secondly, 
that a Papal declaration should be made that the Tridentine 
prelates came to Rome simply as ordinary bishops and 
not as fathers of a General Council ; this latter demand 
contained in it the tacit acknowledgment that the transla- 
tion of the Council had been invalid. The Pope hoped to find 
a way out in the fact that he had not invited the Tridentine 
bishops to Rome expressly for the consideration of Church 
reform, and further that not all but only some had been 
summoned for that purpose. Such invitations were sent on 
the 1 8th of July to Cardinal Pacheco, Bishop of Jaen, Pietro 
Tagliavia, Archbishop of Palermo, Francesco Navarro, 
Bishop of Badajoz, and Giambernardo Diaz, Bishop of 
Calahorra, In order that it might be more clearly under- 
stood that the prelates were bidden only as individuals, 
summonses were sent also to four of the bishops at 
Bologna. 2 

1 See DrUFFEL, I., 271 ^^^'.j 274; ^y^. Histor. Zeitschrift, XXXII., 419. 

2 *Letter of Cardinal Farnese to Bertano, dat. 1549, July 27 (Inf. 
polit., XIX., 2II''-2l2^ Royal Library, Berlin); Pallavicini, 1. u, 
C. 4 ; MAURENBRECHER, 133* ; DE LEVA, V., 50 seq. 


The briefs, which were sent to each bishop by a special 
messenger, declared that the urgent needs of the Church 
called for special consultations and measures which could 
not be adequately provided for by the Pope and the Sacred 
College alone. His Holiness had therefore determined to 
take the opinion of a portion of the episcopate and com- 
manded them, in virtue of their pledges of holy obedience, 
to present themselves before him within forty days. 

The bishops at Bologna at once declared their readiness 
to answer the call of their supreme head. Not so those of 
Trent. The reply in which they tendered their excuses 
for remaining where they were was dictated by Charles V., 
who thought that by inviting four bishops from Trent 
Paul HI. intended to put a stop to the assembly in that 
city.^ As the Pope expressed himself satisfied with their 
apologies, the Emperor threatened Bertano that he would 
address an appeal to a council and bring on a schism.^ 

In order to steer clear of this extremity Paul HI. yielded 
so far to the Emperor's objections to the Council of 
Bologna as to communicate to Cardinal del Monte on the 
1 3th of September his orders to dismiss the bishops there 
assembled, which were carried out on the 17th. On the 26th 
of September briefs were sent to the bishops who had left 
Bologna in which the Pope exhorted them to keep in readi- 
ness to resume the work of reform at the first call from him.^ 

The disobedience of the Tridentine prelates had not 
been taken calmly by Paul III.* On the 1 8th of September 

1 See Pallavicini, 1. 11, c. 4 ; Campana, 519. 

2 Cf. Charles V.'s letter to Mendoza of Aug. 18, 1549, in Druffel, 
I., 278. 

3 See Pallavicini, 1. it, c. 4; Massarelli, Diarium IV., ed. 
Merkle, I., 864. 

* See the interesting *report of Serristori of Sept. 2, 1549 (State 
Archives, Florence), 


they received a " Monitorium " rejecting their excuses. The 
Bishops of Badajoz and Calahorra, on the receipt of this 
brief, declared that they would obey the Pope. This was 
excessively disagreeable to the Imperialists. Granvelle 
ordered Mendoza to influence his Holiness "to pacify the 
consciences of the two prelates " ; if this attempt was 
unsuccessful, he must raise a protest. Paul III. warded off 
this danger by declaring by word of mouth that the bishops 
who did not appear would incur no censures.^ 

To all the cares and excitements of these last months 
others undreamed of by the Pope were added about this 

While the negotiations for an alliance with France were 
under consideration, a vital condition had been laid down, 
that Parma must be abandoned by Ottavio Farnese, son- 
in-law of the Emperor, in order that this city, so important 
on account of its situation, might be given to Orazio 
Farnese, the betrothed husband of Diana of Poitiers, 
natural daughter of Henry II.^ In March 1548 it was 
thought in Rome that Ottavio, just made Gonfaloniere 
of the Church, would hand over Parma to his brother.^ 
But herein popular surmise was entirely mistaken. Subse- 
quently the most varied schemes were considered as to 
what was to be done should such an occurrence take 
place, especially as to the manner of compensating Ottavio.* 
Paul III. at last decided on a plan which put the Emperor 
in the dilemma of also refusing to the Holy See what 

* See besides Druffel, I., 289, 293, and Campana, 520, the 
*report of Uberto Strozzi of Oct. 26, 1549 (Gonzaga Archives, 

2 The marriage treaty was already completed (see Ribier, II., 
129 seq.). 

3 See Nuntiaturberichte, X., 275, n. I. 

* Cf. Legaz. di Serristori, 202 ^eq, 

VOL. XII. 29 


he had stubbornly refused to his own son-in-law : Parma 
and Piacenza were to be given back to the Church, 
and Ottavio compensated by Camerino and a sum of 
money. The Imperialists, Margaret, Ottavio, and Cardinal 
Farnese sought in vain to dissuade the Pope. The orders 
were issued to Camillo Orsini to take possession of Parma 
in the name of the Holy See.^ 

Ottavio, whose temper was as fiery as his father's, was 
not, however, inclined to make place for his brother. 
Parma seemed to him too precious a possession — precious, 
moreover, on this account, that he believed himself to be 
held in great affection by the citizens.^ Ever since the 
beginning of 1549 he had stood in intimate relationship 
with the viceroy, Ferrante Gonzaga, as he wished by all 
the means in his power to retain possession of his princi- 
pality. Goaded on by Mendoza, Ottavio determined at 
last upon an act of desperation. On the 20th of October 
1549 he left Rome secretly and hastened to Parma. There 
he attempted to obtain admission, first as lord of the place, 
and, when that plea failed, as vicegerent in the name of 
the Holy See. This Camillo Orsini refused before receiv- 
ing direct authorization from the Pope.^ 

Paul HI. was beside himself on hearing of Ottavio's 
departure. His anger was intensified by the general 
belief that at bottom he was in sympathy with Ottavio's 
proceeding, who had always been his special favourite.* 

* See Uandolo, Relazione in Alb^ri, 2nd Series, III., 341 ; Palla- 
viciNi, 1. 1 1, c. 6 ; DE Leva, V., 56. 

2 See Legaz. di Serristori, 202. 

* See Pallavicini, L 21, c. 6 ; Maurenbrecher, 214 ; de Leva, 
v., 56. 

* See Brosch in the Mitteil. des osterr. Instituts, XXI IL, 151. 
Ottavio had already been described in a *letter of G. M. della Porta of 
Dec. 14, 1537 (State Archives, Florence), as "idolo" of Paul III. 


Such a sympathy, however, was imaginary. On the 
contrary, the Pope wrote to Camillo Orsini forbidding hirn 
to countenance Ottavio's conduct. To the latter he sent 
by special messenger sometimes verbal, sometimes written, 
commands to return to Rome there and then. The Duke, 
far from obeying, had no scruple in appealing to Ferrante 
Gonzaga, the mortal enemy of his house, for aid. Gonzaga 
declared his willingness to furnish him with support upon 
condition that Ottavio would satisfy himself with a 
compensation for Parma or at least hold the duchy as a 
fief from the Emperor. Ottavio thereupon wrote to 
Cardinal Farnese that he would consent to Ferrante's 
conditions if the Pope did not immediately surrender to 
him the city.^ 

On the 5th of November, two days after he had kept the 
anniversary of his coronation,^ Paul III. received authentic 
tidings of the disobedience and ungrateful conduct of his 
pampered grandson. On the following day he went, regard- 
less of the intense cold, to the villa on the Quirinal which 
once had belonged to Cardinal Oliviero Carafa, where 
Cardinal Farnese read to him the letter from Ottavio. The 
Pope's indignation knew no bounds,and waxed greater when 
he perceived that the Cardinal was on the side of the rebel. 
He was attacked by a violent fever accompanied by a 
chill ;^ together with the agitation of the preceding days, 
this illness broke down the old man of eighty-two, who up 

1 Pallavicini, I. II, c. 6; Ribier, II., 247; Druffel, I., 294; 
Lett, di B. Cavalcanti, xv seqq.; Miscell. d. stor. Ital., XVII., 126 
seq. ; GUALANO, 89 ; DE LEVA, V., 56 seq. ; Carte Strozz., I., i, 431. 

2 Ribier, II., 251 seq. 

3 Cf. M. Dandolo's despatch in DE Leva, V., 59; the report of 
d' Urf6 in Ribier, II., 252 seq. ; that of Lasso in Druffel, I., 294 j 
that of Scipione Gabrielli of Nov. 7, 1549 (State Archives, Siena), 
and that of U. Strozzi (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua) of Nov. 7 in 
Appendix No. 39 ; see also Merkle, I., 873 ; II., 3, 491. 


to that time had enjoyed an enviable vitality. Cardinal 
Farnese on the 7th of November ordered the castle of 
St. Angelo to be occupied by Astorre Baglioni and the gates 
of Rome to be closed.^ On the 9th the Pope's condition 
was hopeless. His mind was unclouded, and he once more 
summoned the Cardinals round his bed. It was expected 
that he would appoint two Cardinals reserved in petto, 
but he did not. Paul III. only commended the affairs of 
the Church, and the interests of his beloved family,^ in a 
few words to the Cardinals. If his inordinate family 
affection is taken into consideration, there is nothing in- 
credible in the report that, at his last hour, on the 8th of 
November, during a brief rally, he dictated a brief ordering 
Camillo Orsini to deliver Parma to Ottavio as soon as the 
tidings of his death arrived.^ This order to a certainty was 
given by Cardinal Farnese to Camillo Orsini on November 
the 8th, 1549.4 

On the 9th of November Paul III. made his confession 

* *" Che non entra ne esce un uccello," writes B. Ruggieri on Nov. 7, 
1549 (State Archives, Modena). See also Scipione Gabrielli's *report 
of Nov. 7, 1549 (State Archives, Siena). 

2 See d' Urf6's report and that of Cardinal Ippolito d' Este ot 
Nov. 9, 1549, in Druffel, I., 294 seq. ("le card, de Ghity" is not, as 
Druffel supposes, Gaddi, but Chieti = Carafa); cf. also the *letter of 
B. Ruggieri of Nov. 9, 1549 (State Archives, Modena), and *that of 
F. Franchino of Nov. 9, 1549 (State Archives, Parma), who inter alia 
relates : " S. B. ancora sta in se e parla con sentimento e particolar- 
mente ha dette a Madama et al s. Don Alessandro parole benigne et 
amorevoli, che havrebbe fatto scoppiar a pianger li sassi." 

3 Cf. Pallavicini, 1. II, c. 6, n. 3 ; Carte Strozzi, I., i, 432; BroSCH, 
I., 188; Rachfahl, 20; Merkle, II., 16. 

* See the letter in Appendix No. 40 (Altieri Library, Rome). A. 
Elio, Bishop of Pola, brought the letter on Nov. 1 1 to C. Orsini, who 
did not acknowledge it, since it came from Cardinal Farnese (see 
Gualano, 90); he joined Ottavio on Nov. 14, 1 549 (see Arch. Trent., 
II., 61). 


and received the viaticum devoutly; towards evening there 
was a decided change for the worse,^ and in the early 
morning of the loth he expired.^ 

No one doubted that the ungrateful conduct of Ottavio 
was the immediate cause of death.^ The Venetian ambas- 
sador, dwelling on this circumstance, remarked: "Pope 
Paul was good-hearted, obliging, intelligent, thoughtful. 
No man was ever more worthy to be called magnani- 
mous."* Nepotism, his besetting fault, he acknowledged 
himself, and in his last hours he repeated to himself the 
words of the Psalm, " My sin is ever before me." "If they 
had not had the mastery over me, then should I have been 
without great offence."^ 

The Pope's body was brought without delay to the 
Vatican,^ and placed in a temporary tomb in St. Peter's, 
behind the organ. Out of regard for the merits of the 
deceased Pontiff, the College of Cardinals, on the 13th of 
November, voted out of the treasure in St. Angelo a sum 
of 10,000 ducats, to be deposited with a bank, in order 
to erect a worthy monument in St. Peter's under the 

* See Scipione Gabrielli's *report of Nov. 9, 1549 (State Archives, 

2 See Massarelli, Diarium IV. (ed. Merkle, I., 873): "hora 14" ; 
Lud. Bondini de Branchis Firmani, Diarium {ibid., II., 491): "hora 
13^." Ruggieri says, in his *Ietter of Nov. 10, Paul III. died " fra le 13 
e 14 hore" (State Archives, Siena) ; Masius : "two hours before day" 
(Lacomblet, Archiv, VI., 146) ; Cardinal Farnese in the *Ietter to 
C. Orsini of Nov. 10: "sul far del giorno" (Altieri Library, Rome). 
For the place of Paul III.'s death, see also the evidence in Dengel, 
Der Palazzo di Venezia, 108, n. 4. 

^ See B. Ruggieri's report of Nov. 16, 1549 (State Archives, 

* Alberi, 2nd Series, III., 343. 

s See Raynaldus, 1549, n. 49; Ciaconius, III., 553. 
® See B. Ruggieri's *report of Nov. 10, 1549 (State Archives 
Modena) ; cf. Merkle, 1 1, 4, 491. 


supervision of the Farnesi.^ Cardinal Farnese committed 
the task to the Milanese sculptor Guglielmo della Porta. 
Although begun in 1550, the monument was not finished 
until 1576, The artist originally had intended that the 
principal decoration should consist of figures of the four 
seasons, but, on the advice of Annibale Caro, for these 
were substituted statues of Justice, Wisdom, Prosperity, 
and Peace. The monument was erected near the altar 
of St. Longinus; thence it was removed in 1628 by 
Urban YIII. and placed in the left niche of the principal 

Above a white marble sarcophagus rises the bronze 
eflfigy of the Pope, seated on a throne. He is represented 
as a venerable old man bent beneath the burden of years. 
He is clothed in mantle and pallium. Absorbed in 
meditation, the intellectual head, with its deep-set eyes, 
hollow cheeks, and ample beard, is bowed with calm 
dignity. With his right hand, as if slowly raised, he 
gives the Papal blessing. The sides of the sarcophagus 
are adorned with two masks and two amoretti in bronze. 
On the black tablet of inscription run the words in classic 
conciseness: "Paulo HI. Farnesio Pont. Opt. Max." The 
Farnese lilies and other adornments have been introduced, 
but not a single religious symbol is visible. The base is 
of dark, coloured marble; above it, on volutes, lie the 
allegorical marble figures of Wisdom and Justice. The 
former, a matron, with serious even virile features, holds in 
the right hand a mirror, in the left a book. While this 
form recalls a Sibyl by Michael Angelo, the traits of 
Justice resemble rather the sensuous beauty of some 

1 See Massarelli, Diarium V., ed. Merkle, II,, 12. 

2 See A. Caro, Lett, fam., II., Padova, 1763, 3 ; Vasari, VII., 225, 
546; Mel. d'Archeol., IX., 57 seq. Cf. Zanetti, Monete d' Italia, 
179 ; Lanciani, Scavi, II., 249 ; Thode, v., 235 segq. 


figure by Titian; originally this statue was nude, but in 
1595 was covered with bronze drapery by order of 
Cardinal Edoardo Farnese, who wished to avoid the offence 
which might be caused by the exhibition of an unclothed 
figure in a Christian temple.^ The two corresponding 
images of Peace and Prosperity, for which no room could 
be found in the niche, are now preserved in the Farnese 

This monument, like the character of the Pope whom it 
commemorates, has had to run the gauntlet of opposing 
criticism, as the representative of two epochs. If not 
certainly one of the most beautiful of the Papal monuments 
in St. Peter's,- this work of Guglielmo della Porta,^ despite 
the baroque taste in its architectural details and a certain 
affectation in the allegorical figures, is yet a remarkable 
composition, distinguished by largeness and beauty of 
design. It is the first instance in Rome of the type 
created by Michael Angelo in the monuments of the 
Medici. The great bronze statue of Paul III. is full of 
dignity and majesty. 

* See Mel. d'Archeol., IX., 68. Here (p. 64 seq^ there is also a 
refutation of the legend that the statue represents Giulia Farnese (see 
also Clausse, Farnese, 1 10 ; Maurice Pal6ologue, Rome, Paris, 
1902, 195 seq.). Similar female figures, scantily draped, are still to be 
seen on the monument of Bona Sforza, erected in 1593 in S. Nicola 
at Bari. 

* Thus GreGOROVIUS (Grabdenkmaler des Papste, Leipzig, 1857, 
148). Winckelmann's severe criticism represents the opposite extreme 
{cf. Cancellieri, Mercato, 42). For moderns, see Beissel in 
Stimmen aus Maria Laach, XLVL, 495, and especially RiEGL, 
Barockkunst, 146 seq. 

3 The artist's name appears no less than three times on the monu 
ment (see Forcella, VL, 70). 


The Completion of the Ecclesiastical Revolution in 
England and Scandinavia. — The Protestant Propaganda 
IN France. 

Although the diplomatic relations between Henry VHI. 
and Clement VH. had been broken off in August 1533 and 
in the beginning of the following year the English schism 
had taken place under Parliamentary sanction/ the King 
nevertheless maintained an unofficial agent in Rome. 
The latter, immediately after the election of Paul HI., 
tried to arouse hopes in the Curia that the King might not 
be indisposed to come to terms with the new Pontiff. 
The Imperialists saw in this only a manoeuvre to gain 
time by deceiving the Pope for the consolidation of the 
organized English schism.^ 

The immediate sequence of events showed that the 
Imperialists were right. The Parliament, which was 
opened on the 3rd of November 1534, enacted that the 
King and his successors should be recognir.ed as the sole 
supreme head of the English Church and enjoy all the 
spiritual power and authority involved in that title, even in 
matters of dogma. This statute, which handed over the 
whole life of the Church to the secular authority, was 
supplemented by another declaring that not only all 

' Cf, our remarks, Vol. X. of this work, 284 seq. 
* See Letters and Papers: Henry VIIL, ed. Gairdner, VIL, n. 
1298, 1397, 1403 ; cf. 1257. 



who conspired against the King's person or called him 
heretical and schismatical, but also all who disallowed 
him any one of the titles belonging to him, were liable 
to the penalty of high treason.^ Since to his previous 
titles was now also added that of " Supreme Head on earth 
of the Church of England immediately under God," the 
" English Pope " was henceforth to hand over every loyal 
Catholic to the public executioner. 

The new Act of Supremacy dropped the clause which 
had been introduced in 1531 in order to tranquillize 
Catholic scruples, " that the King was head of the English 
Church so far as the law of Christ permitted." ^ It was 
clear that England was to be torn asunder from the 
centre of Christian unity. The English clergy and laity 
were so steeped in confusion of ideas, pusillanimity, human 
respect, and servility that many did not recognize, or 
refused to admit that they recognized, this fact. They 
clung to the ambiguity of the figurative expression 
Supreme Head, and by means of fanciful explanations shut 
their eyes to the fact that the ecclesiastical supremacy 
claimed by Henry VHI. was something entirely new and 
incompatible with a sincere profession of Catholic faith. 
Under the terrors of the new statutes the majority of the 
English clergy acknowledged the King's supremacy and 
the Vicar-General appointed by him, a layman without 
the slightest link with the priesthood, the arbitrary and 
irreligious Thomas Cromwell.^ 

* Statutes of the Realm, IIL, London, 1817, 26th of Henry VIIL, 
c. I, 13 ; LiNGARD, VL, 239 seq. ; SpiLLMANN, I., 96 seq. 

2 Cf. Vol. X. of this work, 279; Bellesheim in Katholik, 1890, IL, 
75 seq ; Wetzer und Welte, Kirchenlex., XII., 2nd ed., 12 19. 

3 Cf. Bridgett, Fisher, 340 seq.., 346 seq.; Lett, and Pap., VI TI., 
i; Tr^SAL, 120 seq.; Cromwell's character according to Moller 
Kawerau, 205. For the controversy concerning the ofiicia separati 
of the English Church, see Lit Rundschau, 1908, 108 seq. 


Widespread as was the dissatisfaction at the innova- 
tions,^ yet only a few had the spirit to withstand them 
openly from the sense of duty. On these few fell the 
whole weight of the penal laws, the execution of which 
inaugurated in England a reign of terror bloodier than 
any which had yet been known within the pale of 
Christendom. Everyone suspected of denying the royal 
supremacy could be forced to accept an oath the refusal 
of which meant for the unhappy victim of tyranny the 
gibbet or the block.^ 

The first to lay down their lives, on the 4th of May 1535, 
were the Priors of the three Carthusian houses in London, a 
Brigittine monk, and a secular priest. They were hanged, 
cut down while yet alive, and then disembowelled and 
quartered. They all died with an intrepidity of soul 
worthy of the martyrs of the first persecutions.^ The 
same Christian heroism was evinced by two other victims 
of the King's supremacy. They were John Fisher, Bishop 
of Rochester, and his friend, Thomas More, who, since 
April the 17th, 1534, had been held prisoners in the Tower. 
Paul III. attempted to save the Bishop's life by naming him 
a Cardinal,* but thereby only hastened his end. On the 
22nd of June 1535 the grey-headed old man, then in his 
sixty-seventh year, was brought out dressed only in sorry 
rags to the scaffold on Tower Hill and there beheaded, 
his naked body being afterwards exposed to the popu- 

> Cf. Lett, and Pap., VIII., ii ; Tr6sal, 122. 

2 A non-Catholic student (HoOK, Lives of the Archbishops of 
Canterbury, III., London, 1869, 69) speaks of the rule of Henry VIII. 
as "a despotism under legal forms." 

3 Cf. [Chancaeus, M.] Historia aliquot nostri saeculi martyrum, 
Moguntiae, 1550, and Gandavi, 1608; Spili.mann, I., 105 seqq.; 
TresaL, 127 seq. 

* Cf. Vol. XI. of this worV, p. 141. 


lace.^ On the 6th of July he was followed to the same 
place by Thomas More, once Chancellor of England, 
and renowned throughout Europe for his learning. Both 
Fisher and More declared before execution that they 
died in the Catholic faith and as loyal subjects of the 
King. The heads of both of these heroes were set up 
on London Bridge.^ 

Europe rang with grief and indignation on hearing of 
these judicial murders. Nowhere was the excitement 
greater than in Rome; Paul III., with characteristic 
caution, despite the pressure on the part of the Imperialists, 
had acted hitherto with restraint towards Henry VIII., 
especially as the French diplomatists had dazzled him with 
the prospect of a near reaction in that monarch's views 
and promised to do all that lay in their power in that 
direction. So strong was his confidence in the influence of 
Francis I. that he cherished hopes of Fisher's deliverance 
through French intervention until it was too late.^ When 
the tidings of his execution came instead on the very 
morrow, as it were, of his elevation to the purple, the 
perhaps excessive forbearance of the Pope gave way at 
last. It was on the 26th of July, when a letter from the 
French nuncio announced in Rome the death of "the 

^ See Bridgett, 302 seq.^ 381 seq., 409 seq. ; Spillafann, I., 
124 seq.; cf. V. Ortroy in the Anal. Bolland., X. (1891) ; XII. 
(1893). For the martyrdom on June 19, 1535, of the Carthusian 
Newdigate and twelve of his associates, see Camm, S. Newdigate, 
London, 1901. 

2 See RUDHART, Th. Moras, Niirnberg, 1829, 398 seqq, ; Spill- 
MANN, I., 144 seq. ; cf. Bridgett, Th. More, 2nd ed., London, 1892 ; 
Bremond, Th. More, 2nd ed., Paris, 1906. 

2 Besides Lett, and Pap., VIII., n. 713, 746, 786, 812, 837, cf. *Min. 
brev. Arm., 40, t. 51, n. 454 : Admirato Franciae, dat. May 21, 1535 ; 
n. 455 : Card, de Giuri ; n. 456 : Episc. Favent. ; n. 457 : Regi christ. 
dat. May 21, 1535 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 


martyrs of the supremacy."^ The Pope's anger knew no 
bounds. He at once conveyed the tidings to the Cardinals,^ 
and invoked by briefs on the same day the help of the 
Christian princes. In these letters he was able with justice 
to point out that for three long years the Holy See had, 
with the gentleness of the Good Shepherd, borne with 
the behaviour of Henry Vni., patiently hoping from day 
to day that the King would change for the better. As 
this latest act of wickedness had shown, all such hopes 
were futile, and the Pope now recognized the necessity of 
" using the branding iron " and declaring as worthy of 
deposition the King who for more than two years already 
had been living under excommunication, as a heretic 
schismatic, notorious adulterer, open murderer, sacrilegious 
despoiler, destroyer and transgressor against the majesty 
of God.3 

The Pope was strengthened in this intention still 
further by the announcement, at the end of July, of the 
execution of Thomas More.^ A month later a solemn 
Bull was issued in which Henry was urgently implored, 
after the enumeration of his misdeeds, to repent within 
three months, but in the case of contumacy the Pope as 

• So called by DiXON (History of the Church of England, I., Lond., 
1884, 25) ; cf. also Kerker, I. Fisher, Tiibingen, i860. 

^ *Hieri il Papa pece legger alcune lettere del nuntio suodi Francia 
concerning the "tragedia" of Fisher's death (*letter of Cardinal 
E. Gonzaga to Agnello, dat. Rom., July 27, 1535, Cod. Barb. Lat, 5788, 
f. 198"^, Vatican Library). G. M. della Porta had already by mistake 
announced the execution of Fisher in *letters from Rome to Urbino on 
May 29 and 31, 1535 (State Archives, Florence). 

' See Raynaldus, 1535, n. 10-13; <^f- Nuntiaturberichte, I., 463 
seq., 466 seq.\ Lett, and Pap., VIIL, 24, 1144; *letter of Cardinal 

E. Gonzaga, dat. July 31, 1535 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua), and of 

F. Peregrino of July 28 and 31, 1535 {ibid.). 

• See Lett. d. princ, L, 134 seq. ; Nuntiaturberichte, I., 466. 


supreme judge of the faithful would apply to him the 
severest penalties to which, in accordance with the then 
existing law, those remaining obdurately under the ban 
of the Church were exposed. He would accordingly be 
declared deposed, his country laid under interdict, his 
subjects absolved from their oath of obedience and called 
upon to make war against the rebel ; foreign nations would 
be forbidden intercourse with the supporters of the schism 
and be vested with the right to make themselves masters 
of their persons and their property.^ 

The mere threat of these penalties made such an impres- 
sion in the Low Countries that English trade suffered 
heavy loss.^ It is therefore probable that if Charles V. 
and Francis I. had made a show of putting the Bull into 
execution, Henry VIII. would have been compelled, by an 
insurrection of his subjects,^ to draw back from the schism 
he had initiated. But it soon became evident that the 
Pope's appeal for help would die away upon the air. 
Francis I. expressed the utmost indignation at Henry's 
deeds of violence, but declared that the first steps must 
come from Charles, as the person most closely interested ; 
the latter, on the contrary, could not see his way to inter- 
fere unless certain of support from King Francis.* 

Paul III. would have willingly proceeded ° without delay, 

* Bull., VL, 195 j^^. (in Raynaldus, 1535, n. 18, wrongly dated); 
cf. Hergenrother, Kirche und Staat, 673 seq. \ Zeitschr. fiir kath. 
Theol, 1895, 609 seq. 

2 Nuntiaturberichte, L, 519 J^^., 524. 
^ See Lett, and Pap., IX., xv. 

* Cf. Lett, and Pap., IX., xiv. For the anger of Francis I., see the 
*letter of F. Peregrine of July 28, 1535 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

^ See the *brief to the "Comes Kildariae in Hibernia" of Aug. 31, 
1535, Min. brev. Arm., 40, t. 52, n. 10 (Secret Archives of the Vatican) ; 
cf. the *report of Sanchez of Aug. 2C, 1535 (Court and State Archives. 


but the attitude both of the French and the Imperialists 
forced him to hold back the Bull from day to day. Thus 
precious time was lost, which Henry made use of to 
consolidate the schism with all the energy, resolution, and 
ruthlessness of his character. 

In addition to this the Sacred College was divided over 
the form of procedure and the composition of the document. 
When in a consistory held on the 26th of November 1535 
the Bull was at last put to the vote, so many objections to 
it were made that yet another revision was ordered.^ 
Paul III. hoped to arrive at a final decision on the loth of 
December. He sent in minutes of his own, but neither of 
the two drafts, which he presented, met with the approval 
of the Cardinals. Although the Pope displayed much self- 
confidence and declared that he wished to surpass the 
great deeds of Julius II., no one but Schonberg shared his 
opinion that the publication of the Bull must be proceeded 
with at once. Unwillingly the Pope dismissed the con- 
sistory without a decision having been come to.^ It was 
now thought that the Bull would appear without the 
Cardinals' consent; but Paul III. shrank from such an 
unusual step.^ 

In the beginning of 1536 the document was once more 
submitted privately to the Cardinals. According to the 
report of Pedro Ortiz, the Imperialist agent in Rome, it 
was afterwards produced in consistory on the nth ot 
January. On the 23rd Ortiz was able to announce that 

"^ Cf. T. Peregrine's *report, dat. Rome, Nov. 27, 1535 (Gonzaga 
Archives, Mantua). 

2 Cf. Cardinal du Bellay's somewhat one-sided report of Dec. 22, 
1535, in the Lett, and Pap., IX., n. 1007, and also ibid., n. 944, 983, 999. 
See also E. Gonzaga's *letter to his mother, dat. Rome, Dec. 10, 1535 
(Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

' See Lett, and Pap., IX., n. 999, 1024. 


the Bull had now received the leaden seals and only 
awaited printing and fixture in public places.^ Then at 
the last moment all was altered by the announcement of 
the death on the 7th of January of the innocent and de- 
fenceless Queen Catherine. Charles V. had no longer any 
interest in the fate of his un fortunate aunt, and the outbreak 
of war with France did the rest. Charles and Francis were 
soon suitors for the support of the powerful King of 
England. Under such circumstances Paul III. had no 
other course to follow than to withdraw the Bull.^ 

Queen Catherine's death was soon followed by that of 
her rival Anne Boleyn. Accused of the worst unchastity, 
she was executed on the 19th of May 1536 by order of 
the uxorious King, who, eleven days later, married Jane 

The fall of Anne Boleyn seemed like a divine judgment. 
It rekindled in Rome the never extinguished hope* that 
the King, designated by Leo X. as " Defender of the Faith," 
would, on the removal of the origo mali, return and be 
reconciled to the Church. Paul III. had also himself 
yielded to this fateful delusion, and declared himself ready 
to smooth the way for the King's return.^ 

While the fulfilment of his desire seemed as easy as 
possible to the Pope, he failed to see that in place of 
Henry's fleeting passion another motive had stepped in, 
and this a financial one, which raised a permanent obstacle 

* See Gayangos, V., 2, n. 5, 6, 11. 

2 See Lett, and Pap., X., xv. 

3 See LiNGARD, VL, 263 seqq. ; Brosch, VL, 295 seqq. 

* Soon after Catherine's death Paul IIL renewed his hopes (see 
F. Peregrino's report of Feb. 12, 1536, Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

6 See Raynaldus, 1536, n. 26 ; Corp. dip!. Port, IIL, 307 seq., and 
the letter of Casale, whose details are quite untrustworthy, in Lett, and 
Pap., X., n. 877. 


to the King's return to the Church.^ Since February 1535 
the dissolution of the English monasteries had been going 
on with almost unexampled unscrupulousness and barbarity, 
a measure which reduced the most powerful adherents of 
the Pope to beggary and brought into the Crown an 
annual revenue of 32,000 pounds and a sum in hard cash 
of 100,000 pounds, amounts representing, at the present 
value of money, 175,000 and 600,000 pounds respectively .^ 

The King had all the less intention of refraining from this 
robbery as the Parliament and the higher clergy dared 
not show any resistance, and the continuance of the war 
between the Emperor and France left Henry in safety 
from any attack from without. But at the beginning of 
October 1536 he was surprised by an uprising in the 
county of Lincoln. This had scarcely been put down 
when the much more dangerous revolt known as the 
"Pilgrimage of Grace" ensued. From the Scottish border 
to the Humber and the Lune the people rose in anger 
against the brutal closure of the monasteries as well as 
against evil social conditions. They demanded the dis- 
missal of the King's bad counsellors and the restoration to 
the Church of her rights. The " Pilgrims," whose numbers 
amounted to 40,000, used all their forces of influence to 
restore the banished religious to their monasteries.^ 

In Rome, where the hopes of Henry's return were now 
seen to be groundless/ the news of the Catholic rising in 

1 Brosch, v., 304 ; Gasquet, II., 2nd ed., 4. 

8 Spillmann, I., 172. For particulars, see Gasquet, Henry VIII. 
and the English Monasteries, 2nd ed., London, 1888; in German, 
Mainz, 1890-1891, and the new edition in one volume, 1906. See also 
Baumer in the Zeitschr. fiir kath. Theol., XIII., 461 seqq. ; VVlLSON, 
Zur Vorgesch. der Auflosung der Kloster in England, Halle, 1900. 

3 LiNGARD, VI., 378 seq. ; Brosch, VI., 315 seq. 

• See Lett, snd Pap., XL, n. 230 


Northern England was hailed with great joy. It seemed 
a happy coincidence that at that very moment, the begin- 
ning of November 1536, the news was circulated that 
James V. of Scotland, whom Paul III. had withheld from 
any alliance with Henry VIII., intended to marry a 
daughter of Francis I. The Pope recommended this 
match most warmly, while at the same time warning 
Francis against any support of Henry VI 11.^ After the 
conclusion of the wedding, on the 19th of January 1537, 
he sent the Scottish king the consecrated hat and sword ^ 
as encouragement to him to help the English Catholics. 
Already, on November the 17th, 1536, a letter had been 
sent to the English people to strengthen them in their 
attachment to the ancient faith and in their resistance to 
the tyranny of Henry VI 11.^ 

A short time afterwards Paul III. contemplated a mission 
which might have been very dangerous to the English 
King.* Reginald Pole was to go as legate to France and 
the Netherlands in order to enter into communication there- 
from with the defenders of Catholicism in England, and 
thus force Henry to give up the schism. Charles V. agreed 
to the scheme, and so also did the French ambassador. 
Thus on the 15th of February Pole was appointed legate 
to Francis I. and to the Regent of the Netherlands " for 
the settlement of the English concerns." As a companion 

* Cf.^ besides the letter in Raynaldus, 1536, n. 29, also *Min. brev. 
Arm., 41, t. 4, n. 244 : *Mag. Franciae, dat. Nov. 7 ; n. 245 : *Regi 
Scotiae, dat. Nov. 9, 1536 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

2 See Raynaldus, 1537, n. 40; Bellesheim, Schottland, I., 330. 

3 Min. brev., loc. cit., n. 259 : *Eccles'''^ et saecularibus Anglie, 
dat. 15 Cal. Dec. 1536 (Secret Archives of the Vatican). 

* The French nuncio called Pole's attention to this in a *letter of 
Nov. 26-29, 1536 (Nunz. di Francia, 2, Secret Archives of the Vatican). 
Pole's mission was then fixed, according to a *letter of F. Peregrine, 
dat. Rome, Dec. 22, 1536 (Gonzaga Archives, Mantua). 

VOL. XIL 30 


and adviser he was accompanied by an old politician, Gian 
Matteo Giberti.* 

Paul III. set great hopes on Pole's mission.^ His 
appointment seemed, in fact, a move in the right direction. 
The Cardinal had old relations with Henry VHI,, who, 
on receiving his outspoken work on the " Unity of the 
Church," had invited him to return to England, where he 
hoped to come to an understanding with him. Although 
Pole rightly thought this too dangerous a request to 
comply with, yet no one seemed more fitted than he to 
influence the King in the direction of peace. On the 
other hand, Pole as a scion of the house of York might 
well cause Henry some alarm and be a stimulus to the 
spirits of the English Catholics. It was believed in Rome 
that two-thirds of the people of England were against 
Henry VI 11,^ As the French nuncio announced that 
James V. of Scotland was ready to cross the English 
border, the most favourable prospect seemed to open of 
forcing Henry to recant.* The latter therefore viewed 
Pole's mission with the most anxious apprehension, and 
determined to use all means, even murder if necessary,^ 
to put the Cardinal out of the way. 

* C< Acta Consist., in Brady, II., 281, and the numerous briefs of 
Feb. 15, 1537, in *Min. brev. Arm., 41, t. 5, n. 146-168, partly in 
Raynaldus, 1537, n. 38 seqq.; see also QuiRlNl, Ep. Poll, II., 34 
scqq. ; LiNGARD, VI., 285 seq. ; Pieper, 113 seq. For the departure, 
see Vol. XI. of this work, p. 165, n. i. 

2 See G. M. della Porta's report, dat. Rome, Dec. 22, 1536 (State 
Archives, Florence, Urb.). 

3 See G. M. della Porta's *report, dat. Rome, Jan. 5 and 18, 1537 
(State Archives, Florence). 

* Cf. Lett, and Pap., XII, i., xxvii. 

' Cardinal Carpi *vvrote on April 21, 1537, from Amiens: "Sono 
certificato da Brian, nuovo ambasciatore Anglico et che per esser 
mignoq di quel re, non vieoe mai <jui che per cosa importante molto, 


There were various causes of the failure of Pole's mission. 
In the first place, it came too late, for he did not receive the 
Legatine Bull until the 31st of March.^ This delay, and still 
more the indecision and blind assurance of the " Pilgrims," 
gave Henry VIII. the time to subdue the northern districts. 
The whole movement was a demonstration rather than an 
actual phase of war, and this Rome did not understand. ^ 
It was precisely their moderation, the trust that their 
leaders displayed towards the English Government, which 
led to the victory of the latter. On the certainty of a 
general amnesty the insurrectionists laid down their arms, 
whereupon the King broke his promise and executed cruel